When someone says anything about “religion and science,” people tend to think of polar opposites, warfare, and sworn enemies. However, we see people finding ways to navigate their scientific and religious commitments every day. This leaves us with a question: How do religion and science interact? Do…
Episode 130 In part 23 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr Fred Ledley. He is a professor of natural & applied science and management at Bentley University in Waltham, MA and director of the center for integration of science and industry. A physician and pediatrician by training, he has performed research in genomics on the faculties of the Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Children's Hospital, and Howard Hughes Medical Institute and founded several biotechnology companies focused on gene therapy or personalized medicine. A widely published researcher, his current work focuses on advancing the translation of scientific discoveries for public value by developing synergies between science, medicine, business, and public policy. He has previously participated in the national, NIH-funded program in “Genetics, Religion and Ethics”, part of the ELSI program of the Human Genome project, and a Templeton-funded program “New Visions in Science, Nature and Religion” at US Santa Barbara. He has written a novel, Sputnik's Child, which explores how science and technology became a faith for members of the baby boom generation and the limits of this faith. He plays clarinet in Shpilkes Klezmer Band and has served on the board of the Boston Jewish Music Festival, Jewish Arts Collaborative, and Celebrity Series of Boston. He joined in a Bnai Mitzvah with his wife, Tamara, at age 31, occasionally reads Torah and serves as darshan as a member of Temple Aliyah in Needham MA, and considers music, hiking the forest, and observing solar eclipses to be spiritual experiences. Check out his book, "Sputnik's Child" here - https://amzn.to/4dgiZAD Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 129 Why do smart people believe dumb things? We unpack cognitive biases, like how judges might deny parole just because they're hungry (or maybe not?). Learn why Steve Jobs wore black turtlenecks, why knowing a little Greek makes pastors dangerous, and why acknowledging your biases doesn't make you immune to them. Plus, we touch on misinformation, trusting experts, and why sometimes, the best advice is to stop learning stuff. It's bias all the way down! Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 128 In part 22 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr Ciara Reyes-Ton. She is a biologist, science writer, and editor who is passionate about science communication to faith communities. She has a Ph.D. in Cell & Molecular Biology from the University of Michigan. She has served as Managing Editor for the American Scientific Affiliation's God & Nature Magazine. She is currently the Digital Content Editor for BioLogos and an Adjunct Professor at Lipscomb University. She also recently helped found the Science Communicators of Faith (SCF), a group dedicated to providing a supportive, collaborative, and Christ-centered community for people of all backgrounds and skill levels to grow in the craft of science communication. She is also the author of “Look Closely,” a science and faith devotional that explores the life of Christ by bringing scripture in conversation with science, from water-walking lizards to dividing cells and resurrecting corals. Outside science, she has a heart for worship and is a proud mom. https://www.mountcarmell.com/ Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 127 In part 21 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Rabbi Dr Jack Shlachter. Jack Shlachter is a physicist who worked at Los Alamos National Laboratory for over thirty years with briefer stints at Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, the Atomic Energy Agency, and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization, the latter two based in Vienna, Austria; he led both the Physics Division and Theoretical Division during his LANL career. In parallel, Jack is an ordained rabbi who led the Jewish congregation in Los Alamos for many years, was the rabbi in Center Moriches, NY, during his years at Brookhaven, and now serves as rabbi of HaMakom, a congregation in Santa Fe, NM as well as the Los Alamos Jewish Center. He has also provided itinerant rabbinic support to far-flung Jewish communities including those in Vienna, Austria, Beijing, China, and Warsaw, Poland. Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 125 This conversation was recorded at the Sinai and Synapses alumni gathering in November 2023. In it, we talk with Dr. Briana Pobiner about the earliest cannibals, fad diets, and what life was like for our paleolithic predecessors. When you're done with this episode, make sure to check out her other interviews as well! https://www.downthewormhole.com/e/human-origins-part-1-with-briana-pobiner-big-questions-and-little-bones/ https://www.downthewormhole.com/e/elevating-the-discourse-with-briana-pobiner-paleoanthropologist/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 125 In part 21 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with JD Stillwater. He is a science ambassador and author who writes and speaks about profound insights from natural reality, insights that drive paradigm shifts, and cultural awakening. He is an officer of the Religious Naturalist Association, and serves on the governing Council of the Institute on Religion in an Age of Science. JD Stillwater - https://www.jdstillwater.earth/ Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 124 We're back! After over two years, we have recorded a new episode, but it's better than that. We've actually recorded a couple of new episodes with a plan in place to record dozens more. Oh, and we have a whole host of interviews lined up with fascinating people that we know you will love. It feels more important than ever to be able to talk about science and religion, and we can't wait to continue this journey with you. In the meantime, we thought it might be fun to talk about what we talk about when we talk about science and religion. Is that the most confusing possible way to say that? Probably, but it works. So join us for a conversation that touches on wonder, trauma, politics, miracles, and unexpected pathways to the divine. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 123 This conversation was recorded at the Sinai and Synapses alumni gathering in November 2023. In it, we talk with Dr. Muhammad Aurangzeb Ahmad about the ethics of AI in Islam, the future of human-computer interaction, and the ethics of bringing a form of consciousness back to life. Muhammad Aurangzeb Ahmad is a Research Scientist at University of Washington's Harborview Medical Center and an Affiliate Assistant Professor in the Department of Computer Science at University of Washington Bothell. His research focuses on algorithmic nudging at scale, simulation modeling for machine learning, Responsible AI, and personality emulation. He has had academic appointments at University of Washington, Center for Cognitive Science at University of Minnesota, Minnesota Population Center, and the Indian Institute of Technology at Kanpur. Muhammad also has worked in applied AI in industry for several startups and advisor to various governmental bodies. He has a PhD in Computer Science from the University of Minnesota. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 122 Today we are joined by author, speaker, and podcaster Rob Bell to talk about his new novel "Where'd You Park Your Spaceship". We talk about delighting in our work, a faith that could survive the end of the world, and how a book about spaceships and distant planets has more to do with what it means to be human than anything he's written before. Rob Bell is the New York Times Bestselling author of fourteen books and plays which have been translated into 25 languages. His visual art can be seen on Instagram @realrobbell, his band is HUMANS ON THE FLOOR, and his podcast is called The RobCast. Rob lives with his family in Ojai, California. https://robbell.com/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript (AI Generated) Zack Jackson (00:22.558) Our guest today is the bestselling author of 14 books and plays, international speaker and host of the Robcast. orb (00:30.161) Okay. Zack Jackson (00:46.582) He lives in Ojai, California, where he hosts two-day small group gatherings, that which you can and should sign up for right now. Link in the description. It is my pleasure and honor to welcome Rob Bell to this podcast. Hey, Rob. Ian Binns (01:02.341) Hey Rob. orb (01:02.45) Hello, fellas. Thanks for having me on. Zack Jackson (01:05.322) Oh, thanks for spending your morning with us. So I have in my hand this very, um, strange and wonderful novel called where'd you park your spaceship? Which even I know the title still to this day brings a smile to your face. Um, the book starts with the line. Ian Binns (01:08.122) Yeah. orb (01:27.205) just to hear you say it, just to hear you say it. Ian Binns (01:30.62) I loved it. Zack Jackson (01:32.21) So the first line in the book is, the earth didn't make it, it got brown balled. Which in total caps, brown balled. Then we meet characters named Heen Grubears, Moogie Fallers and Sir Pong. There's a family game like two pages in where you intentionally slam your head into a fork. And then without any explanation, we have a sentence that says, We took her to the Thrival in our circle that night. So from like the very beginning of this book, I got the feeling that this wasn't going to be a book about a carefully crafted universe or a book about like a message being hammered on over and over again. This was not a carefully crafted universe. This was a novel just stuffed to the brim with delight. Like your absolute delight in your characters, in their alien world, it just comes through so clearly. Can you maybe just tell us a little bit about your relationship to the story and to the people who live in here? orb (02:45.69) What a wonderful setup slash question. Yeah, and honestly. Zack Jackson (02:48.226) Ha ha ha. orb (02:54.101) All I had was delight. I don't have training as a writer. I don't have a background. I haven't really read science fiction. I guess Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. I don't, other than that, I like, all there was, and my work for roughly 30 years has been explaining. That's what like a spiritual teacher does, which is a very particular engagement of the mind. And I had some sense that something was ending, something I'd been doing. It was like an achy, angsty, like a death feeling, like a cellular death. Like you've been doing a thing and it's coming to an end. Don't numb the pain, just let it die. And this story came roaring in. And the only way it worked was what happens next. Like a very innocent, tender, who appears? What are they wearing? What's their name? and that explaining energy. Well, obviously, if you watch a movie and it's clear what the point of the movie is, you're like, ugh, we say heavy-handed, on the nose. You know what I mean? We're out. So it was like taking all of these muscles that I've built up over the years. Like a number of my earlier books, like Love Wins is a thesis. It's an argument. It's a like point A, point B, point C. This relates to this. Zack Jackson (04:07.138) Oh yeah. Zack Jackson (04:17.613) Mm. orb (04:21.905) Here's what I just told you. Here's another example of what I just told you. And this, the delight that you're describing, this was like, all of that was like a kill switch. If any of that earlier musculature was engaged, then immediately it's like crimping a garden hose. No water could come through. It only worked with like, or like the scene where Nune gives her bread is magic speech in the ravine. I was. Zack Jackson (04:33.493) Mm. Zack Jackson (04:44.413) interesting. Zack Jackson (04:49.78) Mm-hmm. orb (04:50.633) in the ravine for like three or four days. Kind of knowing she was going to do something spectacular and he was going to be like, oh my god, what did I just witness? But also not knowing how. So it was like this surreal, almost like a fugue or a trance. Like I, I am creating this and I don't know what's going to happen next. Zack Jackson (05:18.526) Yeah, it's like in that scene, you do something that you do a lot in this book, which is like, you present a situation like, Oh, so-and-so has to pick so-and-so to do this demonstration, who are they going to pick? And then they pick the person and you're just like, of course they picked them because this, that, and the other, but you don't explain the, the intricate backstory behind why everything happens. You're just like, well, of course it happened that way. orb (05:31.824) Yes! orb (05:35.557) Nixie flugers! Ugh. Ian Binns (05:38.492) Thanks for watching! Zack Jackson (05:44.67) And after that happened, like three times I was on board and I was like, well, yeah, of course that happened that way. I don't need a big explanation. There's something happening right now. Let's, let's see this thing that's happening right now. Acknowledge the complexity around it and just look at it. orb (05:57.133) And like, oh, and that scene when, when Nuneye then has the guy that she picks, picks somebody and he picks, who does he pick? He picks Kixie Flugers. Oh my God, picks you, and it's like scandal. The whole school erupts. And then Heen is like, this is obviously a big deal. And then Lines says to Heen's, oh my God, Kixie Flugers used to be with him, but then she was dating so-and-so. And he gives like classic universal high school drama. And you're on another planet that you've just made up sometime in the future and yet god dune picks kixi flugers and kixi flugers looks like a kixi flugers would look like it's just it's just the absurdity of it oh god it's just so enjoyable Zack Jackson (06:35.566) Clearly, right? Zack Jackson (06:44.957) That definitely came across. Ian Binns (06:47.524) Um, one thing I want to just say, Zach will tell you, I'm the, you know, I'm definitely the, the cohost on the show that just goes off on tangents, but you always say there are no tangents. And I, I actually, uh, have that as like a banner on my computer. Cause I love that phrase, but, um, so I. Then working on this huge grant proposal, do all these different things. And so I had a hard time sitting down to read it. And then it was. orb (06:58.377) There are no, yeah, right. orb (07:03.485) Hahaha Ian Binns (07:13.912) And we knew this was coming up and then Zach said, well, good news for you. And then I got your email that the audio version just got released and I, I paid for the Kindle version of the book. And so I, you know, got the audio, um, the audio version of it. And I love the fact that you read it, um, and synced it all up. And so I was telling Zach right before he came on that, you know, I was maybe a hundred pages then when I started listening and, and then I thought, you know, I really want to hear Rob say Brown bald. So I went all the way back to the beginning and restarted the whole book, just so I could experience that. And I think that really connects because you had an episode, you released an episode recently for your own podcast, keep the tears in, or do I keep the tears or something? I can't leave the tears in. And I had not gotten to that part of the book yet. I was right before it, didn't really give anything away. So I was good with that. Zack Jackson (07:44.931) Yes. orb (08:01.774) Oh yeah, leave the tears in? Yeah. Ian Binns (08:13.228) Um, but what I loved about that episode, and it's funny cause I, you know, highlighted all throughout the book, made all these little annotations and notes. Many of the notes that I made was I love that you're laughing while reading this. I love that your emotions are coming out. It's, I mean, it connected me more to the book and the characters than I think listen to it regularly. And then you release that episode and talked about your experiences in the past and then experience with this one. orb (08:31.159) Mmm. Mm-hmm. orb (08:37.346) Mm-hmm. Ian Binns (08:40.984) I know you talked about maybe a little bit in the episode, but how did it feel just letting you be you while reading your work? orb (08:50.745) like a rebirth, like the other work that I've gotten to do over the years was like a warm-up. When I first had written this and knew no publisher is gonna want this, no one may ever read it, but I shared it with a couple friends and like one friend was like, this is what it's actually like to be your friend. I was like, are you kidding? I was so... Ian Binns (08:52.632) Yeah? Can you explain more? Ian Binns (09:00.794) Yeah. Zack Jackson (09:06.478) the Ian Binns (09:13.177) Yeah. orb (09:21.069) it disruptive in the very best way, because I had some sense like, why does, how am I, however old I was at the time, 51, and what is age? But how do I feel like I'm, this feels, yeah, it had some like coming home feeling. And even publishing, like classic New York publishing, there are, Zack Jackson (09:40.279) Hmm. Ian Binns (09:40.388) Yeah. Well, go ahead. orb (09:49.845) which was very good to me. And yet some sense like right away with the book, I was like, if I take this into a publisher, they're gonna be like, yeah, this isn't a Rob Bell book. I remember thinking, but I'm Rob Bell. So I distinctly remember thinking, oh my God, if you'll have to just do this on your own and it'll probably cost. And so it became like a rearranging my life. Like. Zack Jackson (10:00.517) Hahaha! orb (10:17.765) Hence, I'm like in the corner of a garage, like starting over. And then, oh yeah, I'll have to just make the audio book myself, but each step of like, this could really not work, no one may care, became oddly like a blinking green light. Like, are you okay following what feels like an even deeper level of self? Ian Binns (10:36.837) Yeah. orb (10:46.713) even if it means you like are some guy who lost the plot and he's in a garage in Ojai talking about spaceships. But then I would share it with friends. Literally there are friends who are like, I just read the draft of this thing you sent me. It gave me a couple of days to recover because it affected me so deeply. It's the most personal thing you've ever done. And I'd be like, what is, what? So it just like the Tao Te Ching, unknowing, knowing and unknowing. It had a very Zen like. Ian Binns (10:53.613) Yeah. Ian Binns (11:12.475) Yeah. orb (11:16.357) Rob Bell, you know nothing about how everything works. And especially the work for years was like right down the middle. This is what I'm saying, this is what I just said. This is an example of it. And this is every single interaction about this story is like people like, yeah, my mom died three years ago. I'm trying to like the most personal, it was like instantly I was talking, we were connecting on some, Ian Binns (11:27.696) Mm-hmm. orb (11:45.633) other level, you know what I mean? Which was like, I obviously people know about this with fiction and literature for thousands of years, but for me, you're right. Some discovery of some self, like some more, I don't know how you even say it, because we're all just sort of step by step by step. Ian Binns (11:47.076) Yeah, yeah. Zack Jackson (11:47.543) Yeah. Ian Binns (12:02.532) Well, and I loved the fact, you know, as I said, you know, I was already connecting with the story and the characters, but then hearing you read it. So the, one of the reasons why I love listening to your podcast is because I feel, I feel like you always start off with hello friends. And then when you name the title, you usually laugh and you always talk about the importance of laughing. And, and so I feel like we're, it's a connection, right? That you're developed because you're being who I assume is you. Um, you're being very personable. Um, orb (12:26.733) Yeah, yeah, yeah. Ian Binns (12:32.22) You know, I've sat in on several of your classes throughout the pandemic. These are online. It, I got the same feeling. And then when reading this, it just, it was like a very long or multiple podcast episodes, and you just sounded like you were really enjoying yourself. orb (12:39.387) Mm-hmm. orb (12:44.424) Yeah. really enjoying myself. And even when I started thinking, because I would come in at the end of the day when I was writing and say to Kristen, like, this is what Dill Tud did today. She'd be like, and she would just say, my God, you just love to talk about your characters. And honestly, other books was like, the book goes out, you do some interviews, quote unquote promotion, and then onto the next thing. It was like a window of time where you're out, whatever touring, and this was like. Oh, wait, if I actually released this, I would talk about this for the rest of my life. It was like, so yeah, very personal. Like, oh no, I would be doing this. This is like the most enjoyable thing I could think of. Talking to you guys is like, oh my God, we're gonna have another discussion about where'd you park your spaceship? I'm so excited. So it jumbled, like even if you think about like, free market economics, if you make something that you gotta go out and hustle. Ian Binns (13:22.426) Yeah. Zack Jackson (13:36.659) Yeah. If I. orb (13:44.473) it like just obliterated even that stuff. Or recording the audio book like didn't be, you know, another platform, another, it became like, oh my God, that would be so fun to like read it and like turn the pages like I'm just reading it to you. Cause when I am writing a book in this book, I would call friends and read them scenes without them having any context for the story. I'd give them like 10 seconds of context and then just read them. Zack Jackson (13:44.632) Hmm. Ian Binns (14:08.464) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (14:08.567) Hmm orb (14:11.717) the first time that Dill Todd walks up and talks to Heen. Cause I knew if this scene, but like I remember multiple scenes where I would have them, I would read it to somebody, I'd call a friend and just be like, Hey, can I read you this scene? And almost like if the scene works with absolutely no context, and I was like, Oh, we're onto something. It's good, but very personal. So if you feel that in the audio book, Ian Binns (14:16.048) which I thought was great by the way. Ian Binns (14:36.696) Yeah. Zack Jackson (14:36.814) Hmm. orb (14:41.469) That delights me because that's actually what it's felt like. Ian Binns (14:46.436) Well, and if I can, I know Zach, you wanted to say something, but I told Zach this too. Well, you know, over the last couple of weeks. So, um, I had to, uh, I was doing a lot of pickup. My, my son goes to a school that's a Mandarin language immersion program. And so he, we have taken him to a hub stop and pick him up from there. And so I was constantly listening to it in the car and he's, he's 13, I have 13 year old boy, girl twins. And so he would get in, you know, I'd take him to the bus in the morning. Zack Jackson (14:47.02) Yeah. Ian Binns (15:13.912) And he would listen to it with me and then I would listen to it some throughout the day. Uh, and then when I'd pick him up, he would come in and then all of a sudden, yeah, he's like, okay, so wait, dad, what's going on now? Um, but I had to keep moving forward to get it done. And so finally I just said, it's like, okay, buddy, I need to give you the book. You need to listen to it and read it, you know, and hopefully he will, but he, he was really getting into it. And every time you would laugh or someone that I'm like, did you hear him laugh? That's great. Isn't it? So. orb (15:20.401) He's missed some of that. He's missed it. Zack Jackson (15:25.879) Ha ha ha. orb (15:42.137) And you're like, your son's like, can you, can you just rewind to when I got out of the car for school? And you're like, no, no. I mean, I love you. Right. I love you, but not that much. Like I gotta know what happens next. I'm not going to, I already know that part. Ian Binns (15:45.388) Yeah. No, I I'm preparing to talk to him. Yeah. Yeah, so is neat. I mean he and he I love that it he connected with it as well. I thought it was really neat. Zack Jackson (15:58.316) Right. Zack Jackson (16:03.842) Well, I mean, every single part of this, the plot of this book is laid out on the back of the book, but you just have no idea what any of those words mean until you read the book. orb (16:12.201) Good, good, good. I love the idea of laying out the whole thing right before you, the whole where it's headed, in such a way that it's even more mystery. Yeah. Zack Jackson (16:26.506) Right? Like I read the back and then Nunez shows up and he learns that she's assigned seven sent to Ferdus to do a graining. And I'm like, well, I don't know what that means, but three quarters of the way through the book. I was like, oh yeah, that was on the back of the book. I get it now. orb (16:32.357) Yeah, good, good. Just word salad. I was like just. orb (16:42.277) Yes, so like there's a words, there's a, there's a word salad thing you can do that is, oh, you want a description on the back of the book? It's almost like a spoof of a description on the back of the book. Okay, I'll give you a detailed description of what happens in this book. You know, almost like, like a wink to the publishing world. It's like, you gotta give them a full, you know, like the Instagram video, you gotta hook them in the first three seconds. It's like a, all these conventional wisdom rules. They're like, okay. Zack Jackson (16:55.79) Hmm. Zack Jackson (17:01.486) Thanks for watching! Zack Jackson (17:08.178) Mm-hmm. orb (17:12.865) Okay, I could do the rule, but I'm going to do it so over the top, but it's like laughing at it. It's memeing itself. Zack Jackson (17:20.382) Oh, it's so, it's so, I mean, you say you've read Douglas Adams and that comes through so much. It's like, I'm reading this book and I'm thinking like, this is the sort of flippant irreverent hilarity of, of like Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. But with like that sort of laser focused, this is what it means to be human of C.S. Lewis. You know, when you're reading one of his allegorical stories. orb (17:26.054) I'm sorry. orb (17:44.041) Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Zack Jackson (17:47.178) And you're like, Oh yeah, I am a demon. You're right. Not really, but you know, I, I also say those things. I definitely that definitely came through. orb (17:47.342) Mmm. Ian Binns (17:50.524) Hehehe orb (17:53.401) Yeah, wow. Wow. That's fascinating. Ian Binns (17:58.968) And see, I didn't... Go ahead. Zack Jackson (17:59.234) So can I make an observation? Okay. And then you can tell me if I'm totally off because you said a little bit before that people would tell you this is the most Rob Bell we've ever read. This is just coming through so naturally. This feels like a new thing. But when I look at the books you've put out at least, there seems to be a kind of trajectory to it where your pastoral works are these short books that wrestle with a topic creatively and with fun images that are easy to preach, but they very much feel like sermon series. And then that goes on until you wrote, what is the Bible, which feels like you're letting us in on the like the mechanics of how you read the Bible and all of the things that grounded your previous works. Now you've given us the tools to do that too. And then you wrote everything is spiritual, which is that but for the soul. orb (18:47.567) Mmm. Zack Jackson (18:58.826) Here is the kind of the magnum opus of what it means to be all the work I've done. So I feel like if you read what is the Bible and everything is spiritual, it's almost like an accidental discipleship where now you can now read the world the way Rob Bell reads the world. You don't need me to write these little pastoral books anymore. Now I'm free to go on and explore this other more. orb (19:00.165) Wow! orb (19:24.882) Mmm. Zack Jackson (19:25.538) fictional world. I don't want to call it allegorical because I know it's not, this isn't Pilgrim's Progress or anything. But it almost felt like you were freeing yourself by giving us the tools to do the things that Rob Bell did in the world for so long. orb (19:30.953) Oh yeah, that's a really... orb (19:40.989) Well, it's so interesting that you say that because like I came, I was, I was born and raised in this particular Christian tradition that was called itself evangelical, which meant Protestant, which Protestant is like, how do we change the world? A guy nailed a bunch of theses to a door in Germany. Like how do you deal with the pain of the world? Think and. Zack Jackson (20:03.174) No. orb (20:08.729) stuff. And at some level, it's like a disembodied propositions, get them right in your head, get the furniture arranged right in your head, and then you're good. And at some level, I can see a long, slow learning to be in my body. I mean, I remember in my early 20s, discovering that Jesus was a Jewish rabbi, being like, wait a second. Zack Jackson (20:09.954) Yeah, thinking stuff. orb (20:37.937) Like he's actually talking about economics. Everything is economics and politics and social fabric and safety net and how you relate to the currency of the empire. So that's really interesting what you just outlined is it started with like almost like standing there telling people stuff and then it just keeps sinking more and more incarnation, more and more body until we're like, well, here's how you can read that and then it becomes Ian Binns (20:38.917) Yeah orb (21:07.569) Here's the events in this body that shaped me. And then at some point you toss out, we don't even have to do concepts anymore. We can just go right to worlds. I just picture it just like just sinking more and more and more and more into body until there's no propositions left because it's just written, like written on the heart essentially. Zack Jackson (21:20.718) Mm-hmm. Yeah. Zack Jackson (21:32.35) Yeah. Oh, that's what's so great about science fiction. And this is like science fiction ish. Just in that it takes place on another planet, but orb (21:38.037) Yeah. One interviewer on a science fiction podcast was like, other than planets and space ship, other planets and space ship, what makes a science fiction? And I was like, I didn't say that. Don't ask me. Zack Jackson (21:55.086) That's what Kurt Vonnegut said that. He said, I'm, I'm a science fiction writer because somebody told me I was. orb (22:01.093) Right, I'm like, I'm not making claims here. Zack Jackson (22:05.702) But that's the beauty, that's the like the best of science fiction is we take what it means to be human and we play it out on a stage that's so outrageous that it's not going to too closely allegorize, but we can work out in them what's happening here with us. Ian Binns (22:10.501) Mm-hmm. orb (22:21.501) Oh, and it just comes in like Game of Thrones. I don't know where Westeros is. But I know greed. I can I know that feeling. Ian Binns (22:27.468) Oh yeah. Yeah. Zack Jackson (22:30.973) Uh-huh. orb (22:35.089) That's really well said. That's funny. Zack Jackson (22:39.318) So in this universe of yours, the earth gets brownballed in the first sentence, which means we basically destroyed the topsoil and nothing can grow. Our atmosphere is polluted. There's nothing living left on it. Everything is brown now. And we had to leave. The humanity had to go out into the stars and colonize other planets with hopefully a bit more intentionality. So imagining that universe. What do you think those people who left Earth, those people who were religious, how do you think that sort of thing would affect their view of God, the divine? How do we bring God with us to the stars? orb (23:24.069) Right, right, because the... orb (23:29.678) you're going to have to have some understanding that can handle that. Which in some ways has been all along. Apocalypse is often looming. I mean, you think about how many texts apocalypse is looming. I mean, think about how many saviors. The only way I can make you think I'm a savior is if I can show you politically, religiously otherwise, I have to be able to show you an apocalypse to show you your need for someone to save you from it. Zack Jackson (23:33.848) Yeah. Zack Jackson (23:57.339) Mm. orb (23:58.473) and even the crashing of the stock market, I'll protect you because it's coming. You know, that's like a thing. Why 2K? Think of how many of these. I have the answer to help you escape becoming wrath. So perhaps sometimes those arise in order to destroy whatever conception is so limited that it's actually dependent on avoiding that thing. Whatever it is, if it's ultimate reality, all of it has to exist within, it has to be able to handle even that. Zack Jackson (24:21.134) Mmm. Ian Binns (24:21.177) Right. orb (24:30.053) You know, like if a story, if you're animating myth, AKA your religion, that which holds you together can't absorb the earth not making it, then you need to get a new one. Zack Jackson (24:30.285) Yeah. Zack Jackson (24:47.334) I imagine people in that universe did. They would have had to. orb (24:49.293) Well, imagine, yeah, imagine, well, I mean, we have very straightforward examples of this, like Galileo's like, we're not actually the center. There's something called the sun, which is the center. And you have a whole hierarchical worldview, which keeps lots of different people above other people. And you have that system going, no, no. And he's like, well, actually, we just have this thing called a telescope. We figured out how to make glass out of sand. We put two of them in a metal tube. You can see. Ian Binns (25:17.634) Mm-hmm. orb (25:18.621) Um, we have very real examples of this in not so recent history when new information or new events shatter. Whatever the story is, it's holding people together and it either doubles down. Oh, here's one America's the greatest nation on the face of the earth. Hmm. You just lost in Afghanistan to a group of locals using weapons that they got from Russia in the eighties. Ian Binns (25:36.632) Yeah. orb (25:47.805) You know what I mean? Like the greatest military superpower lost. Like Taliban won, America zero. So like you either readjust your narrative or you double down and now the absurdity really gets amped up. So you're right, they have to, they have to at some way, yeah, like whatever wasn't big enough has to get big fast. Ian Binns (25:59.853) Yeah. Zack Jackson (26:17.738) Yeah. Most of the apocalyptic literature in the Bible, at least, is like, here's the end of your world. Here's the end of everything you know. Your whole system stops working. The enemies are winning. And then there is hope because God stops it before the ultimate end. So I imagine in this world that's dying, there's all these people with this like religious faith that's built on that sort of thing. That's like God would never let the earth die. Ian Binns (26:18.021) Yeah. orb (26:27.493) Right, right, right. orb (26:36.474) Right. Zack Jackson (26:47.19) That's the end. That's the stop of the suffering. The earth is it. And then as the earth continues to die, they have to reevaluate, oh goodness, what is the end then? What is the next thing? What is the next thing that's more expansive, that's higher that. orb (26:59.462) Right. And that's what I, and when I learned that the earth brown balled, and I like that sentence, when I learned that the earth brown balled, because I had to explain how to get a guy on Ferdus asking a guy, we had to like, what was so interesting to me is, oh, take the worst fear in the air right now and just have it happen. Just have that be the starting point. It's like in a marriage. Think about a marriage, a couple has an argument that just keeps coming up. Zack Jackson (27:11.769) Hahaha! Zack Jackson (27:21.387) Mm. orb (27:30.593) Try the three of us to imagine that. There's some issue that keeps, sort of keeps coming up. And all of a sudden, one day in the midst of an argument, one of the partners says to the other, well, if we're gonna stay together, we're gonna need to get to the root of this. But they've never ever remotely discussed or considered not staying together. But the one of them said it. And there's like a holy terror of like, wait, did you just say that? But you the observer, if you were observing the argument, it'd be like, that's like one of the best things they could have said, because they're gonna probably get, so it's like speak the unspeakable, and notice how the nervous system weirdly relaxes. There's an openness, even like a democracy is an experiment. Well, some experiments fail. Like just take all the terror of January 6th, take all the terror of election. Ian Binns (28:03.501) Right. Zack Jackson (28:14.627) Hmm. orb (28:26.929) Medley just take it all and go. Yeah, it did it was an experiment some experiments fail and Weirdly enough and affection arises maybe even imagination Which I think I knew even I mean the thing that really is interesting to me and what you were just saying Zach is Jesus isn't like oh, let's do everything we can to keep the temple together. He's like, oh, yeah this whole thing's This whole idea that the divine dwells in a building Yeah, fine for like Ian Binns (28:32.773) Yeah. orb (28:56.781) not one stone will remain on top of another. It's almost like he's like, in order for you all to understand that the whole earth is a temple, that all of it's holy and sacred, yeah, it might need to come down. He doesn't seem to be shy away from, if that's what it'll take, fine. Zack Jackson (29:13.undefined) Yeah. Ian Binns (29:19.353) Yeah. Zack Jackson (29:20.644) And they did. The Jews and the Christians both built new systems that were more expensive, that didn't need to live in the temple. orb (29:25.457) Right. I've been asking people this, try this by the way. This is really fun. Say to somebody, cause I've been trying this out and I love what it does to people, me included. I'll say to them, hey, next year, check this out. Biden versus Trump. Here we go. Zack Jackson (29:46.41) You talk about feeling something in your body. orb (29:46.581) And notice, and people, you can just see people throw up in their mouth. And as like, are you kidding me? Those are the options next fall. And yet what's also interesting is you, if you zoom out just to touch, perhaps that as the options is the kind of pain the system needs to be in. But for like, maybe the system hasn't bottomed out yet. Like these are the options here in America where we, where we've Ian Binns (29:48.348) Mmm. orb (30:15.009) have a tradition of coming up with kind of awesome stuff. This is what perhaps a system hasn't, and obviously we know from addiction and lots of different things, you have to hit the wall at some level. And all of it, like think of how many, for the three of us, how many moments in your life you were in enough pain to actually start asking a whole new set of questions. But like try that Biden versus Trump, say it like it's the coolest thing ever and just watch people like, are you, Ian Binns (30:18.425) Yeah. Ian Binns (30:38.146) Yeah. orb (30:44.605) But like that disgust, that disgust is how we actually do new things. Like seriously? Ian Binns (30:53.072) Yeah. Zack Jackson (30:55.242) Yeah, sometimes you need to be searching for an enigmatic man with your assassin and have entrails dropped on top of your head. You know, sometimes that's just what happens. orb (31:11.165) Please clarify for your listeners that that's a reference to the book. Ian Binns (31:14.821) That scene was so amazing. Zack Jackson (31:15.434) Oh, that's one of those things that you can say about the book that makes no sense until you get to the part where it's in. orb (31:20.613) I just love the second time she appears in his bedroom and he's like, wait, you can't find Diltud? And then he says it again without the question, wait, you can't find Diltud? Like he's so delighted. Wait, has this happened before? Is this like a thing? And he's like the admiration for Diltud. She's like, yeah, he's just like, he doesn't even really exist. Wait, this is like the greatest news ever. Ian Binns (31:32.848) Hehehehe Ian Binns (31:36.527) Yeah. Zack Jackson (31:46.83) Aren't you supposed to be the best? orb (31:48.229) Yeah, wait, isn't this what you do? Ha ha ha! Zack Jackson (31:51.882) I also love that instead of saying like, well, you know, I'm an official assassin. You would never say that in a bureaucratic system, right? You would use a word like graining, which is so innocuous. It's just, it's so bureaucratic and he just keeps drilling that this is a graining. That's just, you're a murderer. It's what you are. No, no, I'm graining. It's different. It's well, are you. orb (32:02.207) Mmm. orb (32:06.944) This is a grainy. Ian Binns (32:11.001) Yeah. orb (32:14.085) Right. Do you have a gun? Do you have a gun on you right now? Do you have a gun? He's just like, you act like this is so civil, but like how... Ha ha ha. Ian Binns (32:18.552) Yes. Zack Jackson (32:19.598) I'm going to go ahead and turn it off. Zack Jackson (32:25.43) That was a theme that kept coming up as the book progressed. It was like, because earth was destroyed, we had to reform it. Some very smart people decided to create the most effective system possible for the most good for the most people. And from the surface, it looks great. Right. And everyone respects the chairs and the arrangements and all of that. And you can get a job just putting down stakes in the ground. orb (32:43.845) Alright, right. Zack Jackson (32:54.398) And imagining what a neighborhood might look like. That's a whole job. And if you don't like it, go be a baker. That's a job too. And it's just this freedom and wonderful. And you're like, why can't the world work like this? And then the more we look into it, those kinds of bureaucratic words that are used are actually laced with poison. And you realize how much is like. Respectable is not actually good. Ian Binns (32:59.068) Uh huh. Zack Jackson (33:21.974) Right. And I kept seeing, I kept hearing like, Oh, well, you know, we're, we're re we're restructuring the division right now where we're having to make some, uh, some strategic cuts to streamline our team is like, well, you're firing me, you know, and how many things that we can hide by, by making them sound respectable. orb (33:48.85) I was just reading about a hedge fund owner who owns an NFL team and is just making a mess of the NFL team. And the hedge fund owner made billions off of betting on the major banks to survive, but the banks survived because of a government bailout. You're like, that's insidious. Did I? Oh, Carolina in the house. Ian Binns (34:07.189) All right. I'm wondering who you're talking about. Ian Binns (34:16.016) Hmm orb (34:18.161) But like, if you just ponder that loop, if you just ponder that loop for a moment, and the insertion, giant systems that insert themselves in the exchange of goods and services and extract value out of it, adding nothing, exploiting it based on nanosecond computer insertions and trades, generating nothing, contributing nothing. Ian Binns (34:19.092) Maybe like 15 miles that way. orb (34:48.081) just sucking little pennies here and there, but doing it hundreds of billions of times. Like so insidious. Ian Binns (34:56.198) Yes. orb (34:58.369) insidious. Zack Jackson (35:00.086) Yeah, and we put them on magazine covers. They're brilliant. orb (35:03.813) And then, right, right. Contributing nothing. Ian Binns (35:09.36) I wanted to shift to something a little lighthearted. A theme that I loved in your book that I felt like just constantly kept coming up is curiosity amongst the characters. How, you know, when Heen was growing up, he was very, very curious. Would ask questions, you know, just really into it. When he then got into the role of being a series five after the tragedy struck for him. orb (35:22.172) Yeah. Ian Binns (35:39.708) Um, it, it's almost like his curiosity was kind of set aside some because he knew he had this job and you could, I love the fact that I guess in part three, you really get into this, that you can start figuring out. Uh, and I, I was kind of picking up on this pretty quickly that he felt fake until he, he got, yeah, like it. orb (36:02.41) Oh, yeah. Ian Binns (36:05.068) And then you can see the times, especially when he would get irritated with Dill Todd. Um, I love that. And I would put notes in here saying, you know, Oh, you know, you're it's great that he's irritated with Dill Todd simply because Dill Todd is being very curious. Um, and he's being pushed to kind of get back to that part of his childhood, almost of that role of curiosity. Um, which is, yeah, I'm always told by Zach and the others on the show and, and all of my friends and family. How orb (36:21.645) Yes! orb (36:27.609) Mm-hmm. Ian Binns (36:34.752) how curious of a person I am. Cause I just love to learn and love to ask questions and yeah, I love being curious. And so I just, I appreciate you did that throughout this book and showed his struggles with it as well. I thought that was really fascinating. orb (36:37.213) Yeah, scientists, absolutely, yeah. orb (36:48.689) Oh, thank you. That's so well said. Yeah, because you as science, the core of science, the engine of science is curiosity. Oh yeah, and I loved how he starts, like they're discussing things in the bakery and he'll like ask a question and be like, what the fuck, I don't participate in these conversations. I'm the guy just, he keeps, or like when there's a moment when, Zack Jackson (37:11.545) Hahaha. orb (37:18.361) Ziga May has Philippe died and he is like, yeah, no, I just saw him the other day, he's fine. And he's like, wait. As he's like beginning, and then Nune shows up and he's like, you're so fake. You just like connect with everybody but they don't know you're assassin. She's like, wait a second. I'm pretending. You think that you and I don't get a paycheck from the same man. Like she comes to just show him his own shadow like. Ian Binns (37:25.85) Yeah. Ian Binns (37:36.23) Yes. Ian Binns (37:46.106) Yeah. orb (37:46.149) What are you and these Firdes people now buddies or something? No, the two of us have a thing we're doing here. And he's like gradually he can't do the job and he can't pretend. And it's like. Ian Binns (37:59.076) I love when she starts telling him you're in so deep. You don't even see it. orb (38:02.817) You don't even see it. You can, you, oh my God, you're gonna like, and it's like a somehow like his curiosity is like, he's feeling and also when he first met Diltad, I was like, oh my God, how fascinating is this? He's beginning to realize that he's been numb for decades, most of his adult life. But then when he actually begins to feel the first feelings coming out, he's thawing, but the first feelings aren't, Ian Binns (38:05.925) Yeah. orb (38:31.961) a warm embrace of the unit of nature of all reality. It's just supernatural irritation. Like this guy who pretends like we somehow have some long standing relationship and he has these staccato bursts of conversation and he's wearing these multi one-colored outfit. Like, if you decide not to numb yourself and all these numbing devices we have at our disposal and actually. Zack Jackson (38:40.59) without right. Ian Binns (38:40.703) Hehehehe orb (39:00.605) pay attention and be present to what's coming up from within you. It's probably a number of unpleasant things are like ungreaved grief even. And yeah, you really want to feel okay. You want to feel alive. Okay. Here's a couple of things that are a part of feeling alive. Doubt anger rage. It's all part of it. And I just. Ian Binns (39:09.626) Yeah. Ian Binns (39:15.834) Yeah. Zack Jackson (39:18.307) Yeah. Ian Binns (39:18.416) When I, and again, you know, with Dill Tud, he played such an important role of reminding Heen who he is. That's kind of how I took it. Like reminding Heen of his own humanity, of who he used to be before he did this. Zack Jackson (39:27.47) Mm-hmm. orb (39:27.642) Yeah, right. orb (39:34.645) Right, right, right. And yet, he at first is like, is this guy onto me? Does he know? He just creates this horrible paranoia. Ian Binns (39:41.373) Especially when he goes, where'd you park your spaceship? And just, next thing you know, he's passed out. I thought that was great. orb (39:48.805) And then at the end when he's like, and then at the, because the whole thing is building up in some ways to that. And then at the end when he's like, yeah, I ask everybody that. I just, he's like, wait, what? Yeah, yeah, I like to do that. I just see how people respond. It's always fun. There's gotta be somebody who's got one. There has to be somebody. Ian Binns (39:58.8) Hahahaha Zack Jackson (40:00.104) hahahaha Ian Binns (40:09.924) That was good. Zack Jackson (40:10.182) Yeah, I don't think it's too much of a spoiler to say that his job for a good part of this is basically as, um, uh, a spy to the people in charge, eyes on the ground to notice the things that are happening so that they can be corrected along the way, which seems pretty innocuous, but you can't get, you can't get committed, you gotta connect spy leave. And that's his problem because he's, he's seeing, he's so good at seeing, but orb (40:21.445) Right, right. orb (40:26.461) Very straightforward. Yeah, yeah. Zack Jackson (40:39.082) He starts to know and that's when he gets into trouble, right? When it goes from his head down to his gut. There's a brilliant scene on a page three 35 for those who are following along at home, um, in which he has just baked a loaf of, was it rosemary olive oil bread? Um, so yeah, which was a special bread for his mother back on another planet that they've never had there. And he bakes it in the bakery. And this guy. orb (40:44.994) Absolutely. orb (40:57.649) Sourdough with rosemary. Ian Binns (40:57.924) which sounded very tasty. Zack Jackson (41:08.918) bursts in. Oh my gosh. Cause he rushes in and says, I have to have another. And then the narrator, which is he says, he's got a small white dog under his arm. The dog is wearing a sweater on the front of the sweater and big letters. It reads who's taking who for a walk. That's troubling enough, but there's a series of zippers on this man's shirt that run in diagonal lines across his chest and appear to have no purpose. Do you have any more? He sounds desperate. orb (41:09.718) Oh, I love it that you love this scene. Ian Binns (41:11.938) Yeah. Zack Jackson (41:38.514) I just stand there staring at the top of his head. He's losing his hair on top, but it's like, and it just keeps going back and forth in this way where there's this very clear thing happening in front of him. Where this bread that his mother made has touched this man deeply and the man wants more and all he can do is see that he's got too many zippers and his dog is wearing a t-shirt. orb (41:44.489) Yeah. orb (41:47.869) Yes. orb (41:59.877) And he's got hair combing out that's combed over. Yes. Zack Jackson (42:04.754) Like how many times have I been that like here I am looking at the facts of the situation Completely missing what's actually happening orb (42:13.846) And he's telling, or the mustaches, there's like the running theme of like must, I can't get over the mustache. So I just, he gets like hooked on something and yeah. Zack Jackson (42:17.418) Yeah. Zack Jackson (42:22.738) Mm-hmm. Yeah. Oh, I loved that. Ian Binns (42:28.028) I think one of my favorite scenes until we get to the very end where they find Dill Todd and really get, I mean, I loved how this book ended, but the scene in the school where Nune was really just hamming it up with the flower and the water. Oh my, I was laughing hysterically hearing you read that part of the book. I mean, it's just. orb (42:46.23) Oh Ian Binns (42:52.48) And especially someone who's been in a lot of schools since I prepare future teachers, just, I mean, I could totally imagine that whole scene and watching her hamm it up and do all these great things. I mean, it was so well done. I just, yeah, I fully admired that part of the book. orb (43:09.626) Oh, that makes me so happy because... And the fact that she's so opaque, obviously there's like, that's the giant Easter egg with her is you get nothing about her other than this astonishing. So she's the anti-heen. I'm realizing now as you said that, in some ways she's the anti-heen. You get no interior from her. So it's almost like it's very, very hard to feel anything about her other than just surface admiration for these. wide range like Liam Neeson I have a wide range of I have a particular set of skills but in the ravine you could see Heen is watching her like how the how do you know how to talk to like high school students in which she's like keep it completely dangerous the perfect line of danger without crossing she somehow is able to do all these things and leave them in the palm of her hand and shock without Ian Binns (43:45.048) Yes, love that movie, especially that scene. Zack Jackson (43:45.262) Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe Ian Binns (44:08.492) Mm-hmm. orb (44:10.669) And you could just heen, it's just like, what is? Just, he's just one other, it's like a different kind of Diltud irritation. How does she do, what am I even watching? What is, it's like just his curriculum of disorientation. This is like the master's level. It's like Diltud cracks the door and she comes in and just like, yeah, you're not gonna understand any of this. Zack Jackson (44:19.218) Mmm. Zack Jackson (44:33.89) But at the same time, she's like, she's totally just, that's all surface level. That's all playing. She's not being sincere. She's just, she's performing. Yeah. No matter what that looks like. If I have to be a performer, great. If I got to be this improv artist, great. I'm still going to kill you, but you'll know nothing of my heart and soul. And the moment you start to get too close, I'm going to shut you down, you know. Ian Binns (44:41.645) Mm-hmm. orb (44:42.193) Job to do. I always get the job done. Mm-hmm. orb (44:51.249) Yeah. orb (45:01.231) You know, of course, I think later today we're opening up a Where'd You Park Your Store in which there will be a t-shirt that just says in big letters, You messed with the wrong series 5. Ian Binns (45:12.744) Oh, I love that. Zack Jackson (45:13.499) Hahaha! orb (45:15.293) And there's also a t-shirt that says, Heen Who Grows Bears. And there's also, we're about to release, I think either sometime in a couple of days, we're about to release a coffee mug that just says, Piddle, Piddle on it. And there's, yeah. And then there's, oh, and then you'll be able to buy the Brown Ball poster for your wall. Ian Binns (45:20.876) Oh yes, that was great too. I just... Ha ha ha. Zack Jackson (45:24.078) I love that. Ian Binns (45:30.732) Oh my God. Yeah, when he stood up at the school and said that, that was amazing. orb (45:43.437) And then we designed, my friend designed one. And then there's also in that like, you've seen it with New York, but a t-shirt that just has a big heart. It just says, I love Diltud. Zack Jackson (45:44.183) Oh, I need that. orb (45:56.645) And then there's also a t-shirt that just says, you just got Bobby freelanced. Like the multiple deep cut level on that one. Zack Jackson (46:06.914) So I need, I need you to explain this to me. orb (46:09.861) You know, he's going to write a self-help book. You know that, right? Called, you just got to Bobby freelance. But he doesn't come from a family of writer. He doesn't come, he comes from the outer pangs. So right reading wasn't a thing. They weren't very civilized people. So he doesn't really know, but people could tell him he needs to write a book. So he dictates the book to Lan Xing, his girlfriend, but he keeps getting, cause he loves her so much. And it's like his manifesto, his like 12 rules for living kind of thing. But. Zack Jackson (46:12.562) Oh my gosh, how do we have? Ian Binns (46:14.021) Really? orb (46:38.621) He's telling it to her, but he keeps losing, like that he's dictating a book and talking to her. What do you think about that? So the book is the text of his book, but it's also him talking to her about, do you think I should say this next part? Zack Jackson (46:45.646) Hmm. Ian Binns (46:54.492) That's gonna be great. So don't be surprised if you see my name pop up in order requests with your new store coming out because yeah, that's, I could see myself getting some of those things. So. Zack Jackson (46:54.928) hahahaha orb (47:05.936) Uh, good. Oh, and then, you know, there's a Rolling Stones. There's the Rolling Stone, like Mick, Keith, Ronnie, Charlie, these, like, like the four names and, um, Keene, Borns, Nuneye, Diltud, like, you know, this, Zack Jackson (47:06.409) I just love. Ian Binns (47:12.988) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (47:13.356) Yeah. Ian Binns (47:18.748) Gosh Ian Binns (47:22.872) My wife will be like, what are all these shirts that are arriving? I'll just it's okay, honey. It's okay. It's it's my friend Rob's place. Yeah. orb (47:28.689) It's a pedal hoodie. Yeah. Zack Jackson (47:31.374) Of course, clearly, why doesn't everyone have that? Of course. Right? I just love that Bobby Freelance. I was reading all these names that are just totally nonsensical names that came out of your brain, and then suddenly Bobby Freelance. He's not a freelancer, just Bobby Freelance, just his name. orb (47:33.87) What kid doesn't have that? Yeah. Ian Binns (47:35.64) Yeah, yeah. That's so great. orb (47:43.117) Right. Yeah, good. orb (47:50.937) Yeah, and that's the beauty of creating a world is you, I realized the, oh, I guess part way through I was like, oh my God, we're gonna make up all these names, Ra-Bel, aren't we? Yes, every name will be made up. And then all of a sudden he gets on a glide and the guy's name is Wade. And then it goes back to all the names are made up. And then Bobby was like, oh, so there's the pattern and then the breaking of the pattern. But then when you do break the pattern, go full Applebee's. Zack Jackson (48:15.656) Hmm. orb (48:20.497) Go full America. So like when they're at the bowl and it's this incredibly exotic rest, but then, okay. Who are the two people who are arguing at the table next to them? No, don't make up. It's not Forbo and Rasheva. What's, oh yeah, Gretchen and Carl. Like, you know what I mean? Like what's the most, I went to high school with them. So when you go, if you're not gonna make it up, then go full irony free. Zack Jackson (48:41.123) Yeah. orb (48:50.309) America, you know what I mean? Ian Binns (48:52.057) Yeah. Zack Jackson (48:52.066) So it's like, what is that line from, oh, what's his name? My favorite poet, the angry farmer man. Wendell Berry, that quote from Wendell Berry, from the, that the moment that the politicos can start to read your mind, lose it, make more tracks than necessary, like the fox in the snow, like the moment that we think we know what's gonna happen next. orb (49:03.174) Wendell Berry. orb (49:13.681) Oh. orb (49:21.563) Yeah. Zack Jackson (49:21.686) Just you kick out the legs. Keep it, keep it unexpected. Ian Binns (49:22.906) Yeah. orb (49:24.237) Yeah. Mm-hmm. And that's what's interesting about, like I don't have any, like somebody mentioned me at the end of Act Two, and I was like, there's an Act Two? I don't know any of that. The protagonist, like I guess I know what a protagonist is, but I don't have any of that stuff in my head. So it's just, or like when he brings lines back and falls and breaks his jaw and bites off his tongue, I remember thinking, wait. Ian Binns (49:48.777) Mm. orb (49:53.245) I mean, it's like a Wednesday afternoon or something. Wait, my main character can't speak? Like, the narrator can't speak. How long is this gonna, like, not even, didn't see that, literally didn't see it coming. And then, so now I guess there's gonna be a period here where we're waiting for his tongue to get healed, where we'll just, oh, okay. Yeah, kick the legs out, see what we discover. Ian Binns (49:58.688) Yeah. Ian Binns (50:14.298) Yeah. Zack Jackson (50:22.794) Yeah. I mean, isn't that, isn't, I know very little about story writing, uh, other than you make a character you love and then you kick the crap out of them. orb (50:31.549) and then you fall. Yes, yes. Zack Jackson (50:35.294) Yeah. You see how they respond to everything falling apart. orb (50:42.877) So fun. Zack Jackson (50:42.91) I also need to say thank you for including, I yelled, I yelped in joy when I read this part that you included my favorite joke in the entire world in this book. And you made the point of the joke that it's a stupid joke, but that it is his favorite joke in the world because it's my favorite joke in the world. And it's the only joke I know. Ian Binns (50:43.14) It's just, you know, go ahead. orb (51:04.491) Pirate. Zack Jackson (51:06.066) Yeah. So a pirate walks into a bar and the bartender says, Hey, you know, you've got a steering wheel on your belt buckle. And he says, Arrr, it's been driving me nuts all day. The best joke in the world. I said that in church once. Yeah. Ian Binns (51:15.224) Yeah. orb (51:22.621) You can't, it's perfection. You can't, you can't, there's nothing to say. Nothing, what can be said of it? It's the ultimate joke. Zack Jackson (51:33.731) It's the best joke in the world. Ian Binns (51:35.688) So full disclosure, the first time I ever heard that joke was reading it in your book. I had actually never heard that joke. No, yeah. orb (51:40.809) Oh, beautiful. You're welcome. Zack Jackson (51:41.026) Have I never said that joke to you, Ian? That's the only joke I know. I legitimately is the only joke I know. orb (51:46.493) Hmm. The book is bringing the two of you together in new ways. How is it we've been friends this long and I haven't heard your one joke? Ian Binns (51:50.776) in ways we never knew. Zack Jackson (51:52.637) Oh Right? We're always talking about serious stuff. That's the problem. Or Star Wars, sure. Right. Very serious. Yeah. Pretty much. Ian Binns (51:59.undefined) Or Star Wars. orb (52:01.982) Yeah, serious stuff. Yeah. Same category. Ian Binns (52:03.544) Yeah, yeah, very important. Exactly. I just got my Star Wars Advent Calendar opened it up today for the first time. Very excited. My Lego Advent Calendar. It's a major joy this time of year. So. orb (52:11.667) Oh, that is so great. orb (52:18.124) Thank you. Zack Jackson (52:22.45) Yeah. Ian Binns (52:23.58) So what's next for you, Rob, with this series and stuff? You talk, I think you said before, you hope it's gonna be multiple books and you've left it that way. Where do you want to go with the next one? orb (52:34.829) Yeah, well, God, I just, I'm always like, don't say anything, Rob Bell. Just, but obviously it says book one. Like I have a long standing, well, like on the Robcast, I just early on was like, don't be that guy who's talking about what you're making. First off, cause it might be rubbish, whatever you're making, but just tell people, yeah, it's out. Ian Binns (52:58.148) Right. orb (53:04.909) So just be somebody who actually makes things. Early on, that was a thing where it was like, otherwise, you're just that, you know, hey guys, working on chapter seven, and everybody's, but, and then I go and put book one on the cover, which is basically like, there's more. So yeah, there, it's very, very exciting and fun. So yes, there's, I, there's different places we're going to go. And, and like the Bobby, when I realized. Like, What's a Knuckum, one of my plays, is the play that Nord writes early on in this book. And I was like, God, it's so on the nose and ridiculous. But when I realized there was ancillary books, Bobby Freelance is gonna need to write. And then there's some other things that you're gonna need, you're gonna need, that aren't like the book one, book two, book three, but there's these other pieces. So, yes. And yeah, quite, yeah. So, uh. That'll all be coming. And I get very, very excited about where it's headed. Even the idea that it would go forward in time, it may surprise you where different ones. Yeah. Yeah, and I. Ian Binns (54:14.212) Yeah, I mean, I'm excited about where it could go. Zack Jackson (54:14.27) Yeah, but this isn't your first. This isn't your first work of fiction though. I mean, you've written the two plays and this isn't even your first novel. You have. orb (54:24.177) Yeah, there was a one novel years ago and it felt, that first novel in the plays felt, I see at the time how it felt indulgent. Like I had to learn to trust the goodness of life, even as I was going around the world, inviting people to trust the goodness of life and making fun of terms like guilty pleasure and giving people permissions, you know, just give yourself permission slip, follow your heart, all that stuff. This is like Rob Bell'd me. You know what I mean? It's like all these things that I spouted off about standing on stages, holding microphones all over the place, came like boomeranged back and punched me in the face with love. And was like, this thing that you've been like almost doing like on the side, almost like kind of a, because you know responsibly you have this thing that you do. Just. Zack Jackson (54:59.451) Yeah, you're the permission giver who gives you permission. orb (55:25.949) Just let yourself throw yourself into it and see what happens. So it's been a very, see where it goes and just trust it. And then, yeah, just, yeah. Yeah. And all the stuff everybody like, God, how do you pay the bills? How do you arrange your life around that? How do you, all the questions all of us have just, are all the questions that came up all over again. So yeah, that's got like a. Ian Binns (55:30.33) Yeah. Zack Jackson (55:53.822) Yeah, yeah, sometimes. orb (55:55.773) We're literally in the corner of the garage figuring out a new life. Ian Binns (56:01.744) Yeah. Zack Jackson (56:02.326) which I gotta say is very, it's very reassuring for the rest of us that you're doing the same thing, that you are. orb (56:12.954) stuff doesn't go away. Zack Jackson (56:14.686) Yeah, letting a lot of things go, living more simply so that you can follow where, where you're being pulled. orb (56:21.401) Yeah, yeah, that's all the like, all those wobbles. But how are we gonna... And even the... Well, you all, you all know the science. Heisenberg's on... Like, we don't know what the particles are gonna do next. Like the causality of the modern age, like A plus B equals C, we don't get... Maybe. Ian Binns (56:39.374) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (56:43.387) Yeah. Zack Jackson (56:48.886) be the uncertainty you want to see in the world. orb (56:49.789) There's also, right, obedience. There's also, yeah, you throw yourself into it and follow it and then we'll see where it goes. But yes, Ian, in answer to your question, and this has been talking about this has been really interesting energetically because I knew don't give this book coming out and talking to people about this book, let the conversations, just let all that shape the heart because of the... next books two and three and four and maybe five, which have lots of shape. But let, but even, even the, no, don't hold off for just a half second and just talk to people about this and, and see how that shapes even where they go. Brian, Brian Eno has this great line about, he doesn't read fan mail. Ian Binns (57:37.925) Yeah. Zack Jackson (57:41.9) Yeah. orb (57:47.965) because he says people who admire your work are always voices for conservatism because they're like that thing, I love that thing you did. So he's like, I don't wanna hear people tell me how much they like the thing I did because it inherently will put in my head, keep doing that thing you did. But what's so fascinating to me about talking about this book is how many people are like, I can't wait for book two because I have absolutely no idea. And that makes me very happy. Ian Binns (58:14.608) That's right. I have all these conflicting thoughts in my head on where this thing's gonna go and how the characters are gonna interact. But I'm in, it's so exciting. I think that part, you've captured my curiosity. And so I... orb (58:20.515) Right, so. orb (58:25.681) Alright. Yeah. orb (58:30.757) And there's like a giant, giant Easter egg about what happens next. And it's so obvious at the end of the book, but not one person has mentioned it. And not one person has asked for it or thinks that would be interesting. But I have like a, oh no. So I already have like the sophomore album, maybe jazz. And it's people will be like, what? And then, oh. Ian Binns (59:00.141) Yeah. orb (59:00.733) So I already feel the giant, all I have to get, you have to get all that off your head about even what's, then just start over again, because nobody. Ian Binns (59:09.08) See, I wouldn't even want to try to guess what it is because I want that experience you just simulated it up. Like, oh, okay. Like, I didn't see that coming or something like that. Like, I just, I'm, cause you did that a lot throughout this book, so. orb (59:18.853) Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. orb (59:24.773) Yeah, and nobody was asking for this book. Nobody was like, God, when are you going to get around to that thing? So all of it is just enacting everything I've been spouting out about for years. It's like, OK, let's just do this. Yeah. Zack Jackson (59:27.534) Hmm. Ha ha. Zack Jackson (59:40.406) Yeah, I'm anticipating being completely surprised by whatever's next. And then for the format to drastically shift after that. And for book three to just be written in semaphore or something. It's a series of flag movements since book three and who knows? Ian Binns (59:44.823) Mm-hmm. orb (59:54.373) Yeah, Sanskrit. orb (01:00:03.037) So great. Zack Jackson (01:00:05.446) Yeah, well, thank you for sharing your delight with us. You are always a source of inspiration for so many people, the official permission giver. Thank you for accepting that permission for yourself and producing that which makes you come alive. Ian Binns (01:00:07.836) Absolutely. orb (01:00:15.187) Mmm. orb (01:00:19.561) Thank you. Mmm. orb (01:00:29.417) Thank you. That means the world. And thanks for having me on your podcast. Zack Jackson (01:00:32.074) Yeah, everyone should get the book. You should sign up for the two days at Ojai. There's all that and more available at rodbell.com, where there's also links to all of your social media connections, which just like everything else you do, is subversive and delightful and not at all what the professionals would tell you to do. orb (01:01:00.285) There are professionals? Question mark? Zack Jackson (01:01:03.104) I mean, there are people that get paid. Ian Binns (01:01:05.146) Yeah. orb (01:01:05.529) Okay, there we go. Whoa, that's a great distincti
Episode 121 Today we are joined by Dr. Chris Impey to talk about exoplanets, the search for life in space, and the search for meaning on Earth. Dr Impey is a University Distinguished Professor of Astronomy at the University of Arizona. He has over 220 refereed publications on observational cosmology, galaxies, and quasars, and his research has been supported by $20 million in NASA and NSF grants. He has won eleven teaching awards and has taught two online classes with over 300,000 enrolled and 4 million minutes of video lectures watched. He is a past Vice President of the American Astronomical Society, won its Education Prize, has been an NSF Distinguished Teaching Scholar, Carnegie Council's Arizona Professor of the Year, and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Professor. He has written 70 popular articles on cosmology, astrobiology and education, two textbooks, a novel called Shadow World, and eight popular science books: The Living Cosmos, How It Ends, Talking About Life, How It Began, Dreams of Other Worlds, Humble Before the Void, Beyond: The Future of Space Travel, and Einstein's Monsters: The Life and Times of Black Holes. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript (AI Generated) ian (01:16.703) Our guest today is a university distinguished professor of astronomy at the University of Arizona. He has over 220 refereed publications on observational cosmology, galaxies, and quasars, and his research has been supported by $20 million in NASA and NSF grants. He's won 11 teaching awards and has taught two online classes with over 300,000 enrolled and 4 million minutes of video lectures watched. He's a past vice president of the American Astronomical Society, has been an NSF Distinguished Teaching Scholar, Carnegie Council's Arizona Professor of the Year, and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute professor. He has written 70 popular articles on cosmology, astrobiology, and education, two textbooks, a novel called Shadow World and eight popular science books. I'm very excited to welcome Dr. Chris Impey to the podcast today. chris_impey (02:07.898) Yeah, delighted to be with you. zack_jackson (02:09.75) Welcome. That's quite an introduction. Ha ha ha. Thanks for watching. I hope you enjoyed this video. I'll see you in the next one. Bye. ian (02:12.983) Yeah. Obviously, I shortened down what you sent us, and it was tough for me to do that, Chris, because you've done a lot. You know, obviously, I was at fellow academic. I understand the need to do peer-reviewed research and those types of things in our field, but I was really impressed with how much writing you've done for the general public, both articles and also your books. You've written a novel. You've been on several podcasts. Can you kind of tell us a little bit about your background, what is you do, and then how you also got into that part of your profession of making sure you communicate with the general public as well? chris_impey (02:53.298) Sure, you won't hear it in my voice, my accent, but I was born into Edinburgh, I'm a Scott. I had a little transatlantic childhood that sort of wiped out the Scottish borough, but if you feed me single malt whiskey it would come back. And of course, I'm sure you noticed if you've gone to Britain that you look up and there are not many stars visible there. So once I decided to do astronomy I knew I was going to leave, so I did my undergrad work in London. zack_jackson (03:04.15) Thank you. Bye. Ha ha ha! chris_impey (03:22.938) and never look back and I'm a dual citizen now. So astronomy is big in Arizona. I've not looked elsewhere. The grass is never greener anywhere else. We're building the biggest telescopes in the world and we have five observatories within an hour's drive. So this is the perfect place to do observational astronomy. So I'm very happy. But then as people's careers evolve, you know, the writing research papers is important. It's the sort of stocking trade of the academic. But it's also, you know, the texture of the average research article is that of a three-day old bologna sandwich. It's almost designed to be indigestible writing. The constraints of an academic discourse make that happen. So I was always interested in more popular writing, so I segued into textbooks. And then I realized the problem with them is that you've written a textbook and that's a nice challenge. But then the publisher just wants you to update it every year or so. It's like, okay, that's not so exciting. I think I'm not going to do this anymore. And then I think more broadly, apart from just liking education and being very committed to teaching and mentoring students, you know, I've just seen the, well, even before the sort of large waves of misinformation and the assault on facts in our culture, it's, I viewed it as an obligation of a professional scientist to communicate to a larger audience because, well, to be blunt, we're paid by the taxpayer. zack_jackson (04:26.05) Thank you. Bye. zack_jackson (04:44.15) Hmm. chris_impey (04:54.118) And also, there's a lot of misinformation out there, and science is often misperceived or characterized in wrong and inappropriate ways. And so I think all scientists should not just stay in their little lane doing research, but they should, if they can, some better than others. And not everyone can be Neil deGrasse Tyson. That's fine. But I think there's an obligation to communicate to larger audiences. And once I got into it and got practiced and better at it, then I now understand that I mean, it's like I couldn't imagine not doing it. chris_impey (05:32.018) And the books just, okay. And so books just flow out of that because writing popular articles is just a sort of lighter version of writing a technical article. And then, you know, you want a meaty subject. You do a book-length version. So I've been writing about cosmology and astrobiology. And I've started about 10 years ago I say, I think this is my ninth book, Exoplanets. So books are fun. They're more challenging. ian (05:32.543) I almost had to sneeze. Sorry, go ahead. Ha ha ha. chris_impey (06:01.958) to take on a big subject and distill it down and make it, you gotta make it, have a resonance for a person with no, maybe with no background in astronomy or maybe just a little background and you're taking them through what could be a very esoteric subject. So that, I like the challenge of that. Although the books are exhausting. Once I've done a book, I don't wanna, I almost don't wanna look at a book or read a book or write a book for a while. zack_jackson (06:28.65) do people ask you like when's the next one coming out? Like right after you finish. It's like having a baby. I'm not sure if you can tell, but I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. chris_impey (06:31.898) Of course. Yeah, they are. Yeah, it's like I'm not going to go there about the having a baby because my wife would my wife would give me a hard time. There's nothing like having a baby. You can't even imagine, you know, and and and she and yeah, and she's right. But like having a baby, you know, women may feel that and then they do it again, you know, so I write the book, have have a slight, you know, trauma afterwards or just let down. It's a little bit of a let down sometimes. zack_jackson (06:43.89) That is a good man. Good job. ian (06:45.766) Yes. chris_impey (07:01.918) you finished any big-ish thing. But I do like writing, so I'm committed to it. zack_jackson (07:02.094) Hmm. ian (07:09.303) Yeah. zack_jackson (07:10.05) So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot chris_impey (07:15.718) Yeah, it's a super hot field with the number has up to 5,300 last time I checked on NASA's website. And remember, you know, 1995, the number was zero. So this is all, this is all the last few decades and it's just growing gangbusters. And now it's a slightly unfortunate because I have, we have students here who are working on exoplanets or astrobiology. And, you know, there was a time when if you discovered one cool Earth-like planet or water world, ian (07:27.244) I remember that. chris_impey (07:45.818) about it. Well now you know you'd have to find a hundred interesting things to write a paper. So the bar has been raised just by the success of the field. But the interesting thing is that it's moving to a new phase. So the most of what's known about those 5300 exoplanets is not much at all. They're basically is either a mass or a size or maybe both and you get a density and know it's a gas planet or a rocky planet. And that's it. We can't characterize zack_jackson (07:46.792) Hmm. zack_jackson (07:54.15) Yeah. zack_jackson (08:04.316) Hmm. chris_impey (08:15.698) thousands of exoplanets. So the next stage of the game, everyone's taking a deep breath in the research field is to try and characterize the atmospheres and the geology and of course find life. And that's just a very hard experiment. It's just much harder than detecting an exoplanet in the first place. So there's sort of excitement in the air because if I were betting, I would say that within five to seven years, we will have done the experiment of looking for life or Earth planets that are nearest to us and will either know the answer. Either there will be microbes on those planets that have altered their atmospheres or there won't be and that will be an amazing experiment to have done. So it's really on the horizon. But it's daunting because it's a very difficult experiment. Earth-like planets are a billion times fainter than the stars they orbit. So you have to, and they're far away so they appear very close to their star. So you have to isolate the planet from the star, blot out the billion times brighter and then smear the feeble reflected light from the exoplanet into a spectrum and look for molecules that indicate life like oxygen, ozone, methane, water vapor and so on. ian (09:26.503) But the molecules you're looking for are always in the atmosphere itself, right? Like you wouldn't, and I understand that, and I think we all do, but, you know, some people listening may not realize that that's, that's what you're looking at. When you're talking about with the spectrum is that makeup of the atmosphere, nothing about like if there's, if it's a rocky planet, what's on the ground, I guess. zack_jackson (09:26.614) Now. chris_impey (09:30.458) there. chris_impey (09:45.358) Right, right. And it's important for people to realize that the characterizing the exoplanets is done in that indirect way. For instance, of those 5,300, only 150 have ever had an image made of them. You know, seeing is believing. It's nice to have images of exoplanets. That's a hard thing. And those images are, you know, they're pathetic, a few pixels. They're just pale blue dots in a far away. So there's no, and if you ask this, ian (10:02.488) Right. zack_jackson (10:03.35) Thank you. Thank you. chris_impey (10:15.678) The question of when will we be able to make an image of an exoplanet to be able to see continents and oceans? The answer is maybe never. The answer is decades or a very long time because it's just too hard to make images that sharp of things that far away, even with space telescopes. So astronomers have to be a little more indirect and the clever method that's on the table now and will be done, James Webb is doing some of this but was never built to do this experiment, it will actually be better done with the huge... set of ground-based telescopes under construction. So the experiment is you use the star to backlight the exoplanet when it crosses in front of it, and the backlit, the light from the star filters through the atmosphere of the exoplanet and imprints absorption from these relevant molecules called biosignatures. So that's the experiment you're doing. And it's still hard. And it's also not clear you'll get an unambiguous answer. You know, obviously, and its cousin ozone are the prime biomarkers because on Earth, the oxygen we breathe, one part and five of our air, was put there by microbes billions of years ago. So the reverse logic is if you see oxygen on an exoplanet or in the atmosphere of an exoplanet, it must have been put there by life because oxygen is so reactive, so volatile that it disappears. If there's not life to sustain it, say the biosphere of the Earth shut down overnight, the entire biosphere just shut down. ian (11:41.803) Thank you. Thank you. chris_impey (11:45.458) just imagine the thought experiment. Within five to seven billion, a million years, so very short time in geological terms, the oxygen, that one part in five we breathe, would be gone. It would rust things, it would dissolve in seawater, it would oxidize with rocks, and it would be gone. So if it were not put there originally by life and then sustained by photosynthesis and other life processes, it would disappear. So the logic, therefore, is if you see it elsewhere, bang, it's got to be microbes putting it there and causing it to be there. ian (12:16.845) Yeah. zack_jackson (12:16.95) Hmm, unless there's some hitherto unknown non-living process by which these things happen. chris_impey (12:24.058) Right. So that's a good point. And there is a debate there because the data that's going to come in, well, first of all, it'll be noisy. It won't be beautiful, perfect spectra. So they'll be ambiguous to interpret. And then when you see it, what is the, where's, does the bar set for being enough? And the geologists have weighed in on this. And so whereas the sort of simplistic view as well, if you see any significant level of oxygen, certainly 18% like on the earth, what's got to be biology. zack_jackson (12:41.694) Yeah. chris_impey (12:54.218) That's pretty much true, but geologists have figured out ways where without biology, just with geochemical reactions, if you conjure up a geochemistry, you can get 6%, 5%, 7% oxygen. That's quite a lot, more than most people would have expected. So the geologists are saying, well, hold on. Yes, a lot of oxygen is probably a biomarker, but you would have to know more about the planet to be sure that it didn't have some weird chemistry and geology going on. for any of the other biomarkers. Methane is a biomarker too because it's produced on earth, you know, mostly by life, a good fraction of that, cow farts I think. But so it's the same argument. So these wonderful and difficult to obtain spectra are going to be, everyone's going to jump all over them and hope they give an unambiguous answer, but they might not. Science is not always as cut and dried as that at the frontier, which is where we are. But it's the zack_jackson (13:34.511) Hmm. Sure. chris_impey (13:53.958) exciting experiment and it will be done fairly soon. ian (13:58.804) Okay. chris_impey (14:01.358) And then a sort of related issue is that it's not just microbes. I mean, that's just looking for life as we know it on the earth. You could also look with the same technique, and this is an interesting possibility, for what are called techno signatures. So biosignatures is just evidence of life, typically microbes, because we think most life in the universe is going to be microbial, even if it's not exactly like our form of biology. But you could also look for things technology like chlorofluorocarbons, which you know, were responsible for almost killing the ozone layer for a few decades until we sort of ruled them out of refrigeration units. And there are other chemicals that are produced by industrial activity in a civilization, which would normally be very trace ingredients in an atmosphere, barely, you know, not present at all really. And if you could detect them in an atmosphere, it would be indirect evidence of a technological or industrial civilization. Realization on that planet and that will be very exciting. So that's the same method being used to ask a very different question But it's a more challenging experiment because these are trace ingredients. I'll give you an example I mean, we're all aware of climate change global warming and we've seen the carbon dioxide content of our atmosphere Increased by 30% roughly in the last few decades. That's quite a lot. It's obviously concerning and we know the implications But if you step back and look at the earth from afar and say, well, shouldn't that just be obvious? Shouldn't some other alien civilization look at the Earth and say, oh, those people are really screwing up. They're killing their atmosphere with climate change and fossil fuel burning? The answer is probably not because carbon dioxide is a trace ingredient of our atmosphere, and 30% increase on a trace ingredient would actually be very hard to detect from a distance. So even that dramatic thing that we are all anxious about on our planet industrial activity and fossil fuels is not dramatically obvious from a distance. So these are quite difficult experiments. The techno-signature experiment is much harder than the biosignature experiment. zack_jackson (16:13.592) Hmm. ian (16:14.165) Interesting. rachael (16:17.101) One of the things that you had said when looking at these exoplanets was, you know, we look at them and we want to see them and what's going on with them. And then you added the line, and of course, detect life. And that's where our conversation has gone for the last couple of minutes. But I'm wondering, you added that phrase that seems to think that finding life is part, entire reason for studying exoplanets. And I'm wondering, A, why you think that? And B, what that says about, you know, making it very narcissistic and Earth-centered, what that says about us. chris_impey (16:54.799) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (17:02.778) Right. Okay. So good question. I can unpack that in parts. I mean, yes, if I were a geologist or a planetary scientist, I'd be just pleased as punch and happy as a pig in a poke to just study exoplanets. That's all that I'm happy. I've got 5300 new, new geological worlds to study. Whereas the solar system only has a handful. Oh, yeah. So depending on your discipline, you might be totally zack_jackson (17:16.049) Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe rachael (17:19.507) Right! chris_impey (17:32.718) properties. But astrobiology, I mean astrobiology writ large is the study of life in the universe, and the context for that search for life in the universe is the fact that we only know of one example of life, and that's on this planet. And everything in astronomy and the history of astronomy, and the Copernicus onwards, has told us we're not special, has told us there's nothing singular zack_jackson (17:59.891) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (18:02.718) about our solar system, about our galaxy, or our position in the galaxy, and so on. In space and time, we are not special. And so, you know, for biology to be unique to this planet, when the ingredients are widespread, we've detected carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, the biogenic elements out to distances of 12, 13 billion light years, almost to the birth of the universe. Water is one of the, you might think it's special. Earth is a water world. Well, actually, some of the exoplanets have 10 to 30 times more water. water than the Earth. So it's not, the Earth isn't really a water world even, pale blue dot, it's not that special. And water is one of the most abundant molecules in the universe too. So all the ingredients, the table is set for life in the universe. And as the universe is evolved and is quite old, more and more of those biogenic elements are made by stars and spat out into space to become part of new star systems and planets. And so in an old mature universe with a lot of heavy elements, and with many habitable locations now, we the best guess is 20 billion Earth-like habitable worlds just in our galaxy, then it just, whether or not it's central to astrobiology, it absolutely begs the question, is biology unique to this planet? Because it really shouldn't be statistically. However, logically, you know, to be correct and scientific, it's possible that there were a unique set of accidents and flukes that led to life on Earth, and it is unique. It would still chris_impey (19:33.038) It's historical science to wonder how life on earth developed and nobody's ever built a cell from scratch in the lab people have done various parts of that experiment and They can't connect all the dots, but they've done some very interesting experiments that certainly suggest It's not a fluke that the whole thing happened. You need time. You need the possibilities of Chemicals bumping into each other and getting more complex, but that tends to happen It happens if you do it in a computer it in a lab as well as you can. And so the context of the ingredients for life being so widespread and there not seeming to be any sort of bizarre, flukish occurrence in the development of at least replicating molecules that could store information, if not a full cell, would certainly lead you to anticipate life elsewhere. And then game on, because the big question then is, so there are two almost binary questions you're trying to answer, which is why the field is so exciting. Is there life beyond Earth, yes or no? And then if yes, is it like our life? Is it biology? Because everything on Earth, from a fungal spore to a butterfly to a blue whale, is the same biological experiment. They seem like very diverse things, but that's one genetic code. experiment that led to that diversity after a long time, after four billion years of evolution. And there's no reason to expect, even if the ingredients for life and the basis for biology exist far beyond Earth and in many locations, there's no real reason to expect that it would play out the same way elsewhere. And so that second question, is it like Earth life, is a very big question. rachael (21:27.201) Just as a curiosity, when did, if you know, when did microbes appear on Earth? chris_impey (21:39.158) So the earliest, the indications of life on Earth, the history of that is really tricky, because as you know, the Earth is a restless planet, and we weren't there, it's historical science, and it's possible you may never answer the question, but the big problem is the restless Earth. It's very hard, there's only a handful of places on Earth, Western Australia, Greenland, somewhere in South Africa, where you can find four billion year old rocks. They just don't exist. I mean, everything's been churned by geology and eroded rachael (21:46.661) We weren't there. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. rachael (21:56.104) Right. chris_impey (22:09.338) Weathered and so on so just even and that's about when we think life started So you're dealing with you know a crime scene where the evidence has been trampled many times and the crowds have just Obliterated the evidence so that's a hard thing and then the second hard thing is that the incipient Traces of life as you get to cells are very indirect They're sort of just you they're biochemical tracers or sorry there. They're chemical imbalances isotopic imbalances of versus normal carbon and so on. Because you're not looking for fully fossilized cells. So if you're just looking at what would be called chemical tracers of life, they're pretty good, but argumentative, this field is not resolved, traces that go back about 3.8 billion years. If you're asking when do you have the first fossil life forms, fossilized microbes, single cells, rachael (23:00.421) Okay. chris_impey (23:09.238) to 3.4, 3.5 billion years, and that's people then stop arguing about it. I think they believe that evidence. And then there's this enormous long time between that and multi-celled organisms. That step in the evolution of life seems to have taken a long time. You could infer that that means it's difficult or doesn't happen very often, but that's a dangerous inference from data of one. All the inferences, hazardous. So astrobiologists have to keep pinching themselves and saying, it's a sample of one. It's a sample of one. rachael (23:30.921) Thank you. Thank you. zack_jackson (23:32.75) Thank you. Bye. rachael (23:39.721) One does not make a line. One day to... That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. chris_impey (23:41.139) Don't draw too many conclusions. So, yeah, the cell formation, the evolution of the first cells and microbes seem to have taken 300 or 400 million years from the first chemical traces of life. But those chemical traces, we don't know. There's that Zircon that was found in Western Australia, 4.404 billion years accurately measured by radioactive dating. chris_impey (24:09.378) environment and so there's evidence really soon after the earth formed when it was just a hellhole of a place you know impacts and craters and geological activity that the earth surface was almost tacky like magma and yet there were there were any ingredients for life there so nobody would rule out life going back very close to the formation of the earth but then but tracing all these evolutionary paths is really hard I mean we have stromatolites which are modern descendants of the first microbial colonies. You can go to Western Australia, Shark's Bay, I've been there and it's great, they're stromatolites. These were just the same as they were now three billion years ago, it's really cool. One of the things you can't see behind me is my stromatolite collection. rachael (24:53.985) Yeah. rachael (24:59.962) One of the reasons, yeah, that's fascinating. It makes a collector about that. It makes a collector. Um. Yeah. zack_jackson (25:00.071) kind of a few collections chris_impey (25:01.578) Yeah. Oh, well, three. Does that make a collection? ian (25:05.749) It's good enough. chris_impey (25:07.958) Well, yes. It's like primitive counting systems, one, two, many. So I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. rachael (25:13.941) That's right. zack_jackson (25:15.016) Ha! rachael (25:19.021) One of the reasons I was asking that question about Earth, because you were talking about these very far away planets and looking for microbial, likely microbial life, then showing up in the atmosphere by its various products. And so my question was stemming from how far back are these planets that we're looking at? a really long time to create its microbes, then perhaps, since we're looking so far back in time, that maybe those microbes exist now, but when we're looking at them, they didn't exist. Right, that lovely time, space question. chris_impey (25:51.579) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (26:02.098) Right. So in that context, it's important to say that the exoplanets we're finding are in our backyard. So Kepler, NASA's Kepler mission is really responsible for almost half the exoplanets, even though it stopped operating a few years ago. And so the most exoplanets we know of are within 100 to 1,000 light years. And that's our backyard. The Milky Way is 100,000 light years across. rachael (26:12.785) Okay. rachael (26:28.064) Oh, close. Yeah. chris_impey (26:32.398) And of course, logically, therefore, we're only seeing them as they were a century or millennium ago, which is no time geologically. So we can't see that far back. So we're not really looking at ancient history. However, the more important point, having mentioned that carbon nitrogen, oxygen, and water have been around in the universe for a long time, is that we now can very confidently say, even if we can't locate such objects, that an earth clone, rachael (26:32.606) Okay. rachael (26:38.901) Yeah, it's no time at all. Yeah. chris_impey (27:02.098) something as close to Earth as you could imagine, could have been created within a billion years of the Big Bang. And that's seven billion years before the Earth formed. So there are potential biological experiments out there that have a seven billion year head start on us and then add the four billion four and a half billion years of evolution. And that's boggling because you know, we can't imagine what evolution and biology might come up with given 10 or 12 billion years to evolve rather zack_jackson (27:11.75) Hmm. chris_impey (27:31.958) Maybe it makes no difference at all. Maybe these things are slow and they're hard and the Earth was actually one of the fastest kids on the block rather than one of the slowest kids on the block. We don't know. Sample of one again. We'll just put that as a big asterisk over almost everything I say so I don't have to keep saying sample of one. Okay. zack_jackson (27:32.014) Hmm. rachael (27:41.861) Simple of one. zack_jackson (27:42.808) Yeah. zack_jackson (27:48.834) No. rachael (27:49.221) That'll just be today's episode title, right? Today's sample of one. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. chris_impey (27:51.14) Yeah, right. zack_jackson (27:52.65) That's Apple F1. chris_impey (27:55.038) Yeah, induction is a bitch when you can't do it. zack_jackson (27:55.492) So. zack_jackson (28:02.51) So we've talked a lot about the how it's possible, how we might detect it, but what do you think it might do to our sense of self and our sense of spirituality, our sense of humanity, our sense of earth? Should we start discovering life outside of, or at least biological markers in other places? chris_impey (28:28.898) Right. I mean, I think it sort of bifurcates if we find microbial life elsewhere and improve it, you know, it's beyond a reasonable doubt. And even if we don't know if it's our biology or not, it's just a biomarker that's irrefutable or set of biomarkers. That will be a transformative, epochal event in the history of science. It'll be dramatic. But it will make front page headlines and then fade, I would say, fairly rapidly, because it's microbes. zack_jackson (28:44.618) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (28:58.858) Like, that's Ponskum or stuff on your shower curtain, like, okay, who cares? So, I mean being facetious, but not too facetious, because I think the public will just be interested and science interested people will be very interested, and books will be written, and documentaries will be made, and so on. But in the public consciousness, I don't think it will permeate very far or persist very long. Of course, the counterpoint of if we decide we found intelligent life in the universe through those techno markers. zack_jackson (29:03.391) Ha ha ha. chris_impey (29:28.978) you know, the search for artificial radio or optical signals from some civilization. So they're obviously artificial and they couldn't have been produced by nature. That will be more profound, of course, because that's companionship in the universe. And that will raise all sorts of questions. So I think it really divides that way. And since the universe logically, if life exists in the universe elsewhere, there'll be many more microbes than intelligent civilizations. You know. ian (29:29.523) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (29:58.858) seed in that first mode. Although SETI is a side bet. I mean SETI for 65 years has been placing this little side bet. Okay, yeah, we can look for microbes and those are hard experiments and now we can almost do it. But let's always place this side bet of jumping over the evolutionary path from microbes to men or humans and look for those intelligent technological civilizations directly. And so it's worth doing. I'm not science scientists are divided on SETI, even astronomers are divided on it, whether it's a worthwhile pursuit or not, whether it's even scientific or not. That's the strongest critique of SETI is that unlike, you know, if I wanted to go to the National Science Foundation and get a million dollar grant to study some issue of, you know, solid state physics or high energy physics, I'd have to propose an experiment and define my parameters and how I was going to control variables and say how I would interpret the data. could refute or confirm. SETI doesn't have that kind of situation. They don't know how to define success or failure even. Well, they can define success more or less, but they can't define failure and they can't say what the probability of success is. So it's not a normal scientific pursuit. So that's the critique of SETI from scientists, but I still think it's worth doing. ian (31:04.946) Right. ian (31:23.628) Yeah. rachael (31:24.842) You talked about, and I think you're probably right in terms of how much people will care in the long run or in their day-to-day life or, right? Okay, so we found some microbes from, you know, a thousand light years away. I don't, that didn't reduce my student loan at all. But like, didn't, thank you. It's nice, saw the headlines. It's now three years later. chris_impey (31:45.018) Right. rachael (31:54.441) But I've noticed that you did a lot of work with the Vatican and with monks, and I think that that's a different population that might respond to and other religious figures, but specifically those I'm asking you because those are the groups that you've worked with. They might respond a little bit differently to this existence. Could you speak a little bit ian (32:01.35) Yeah chris_impey (32:16.803) Right. rachael (32:23.726) in this idea of how it would change. chris_impey (32:25.658) Sure. And maybe preface it with just the cultural comment, with independent religion, that the other issue that will arise with, I mean, if microbial life is found elsewhere and astrobiology is a real field with the subject matter, finally, yeah, it's foundational for science. And of course, it terraforms biology because, you know, if you want to poke, if physicists want to poke at biologists who say, well, you just spent your whole life studying one form of biology, What about all the other forms? You don't have a general theory of biology like we have a standard model of particle physics because you've just been studying one thing like staring at your navel. Well, what about all that stuff out there? Okay, so so it'll be a big deal for biology for all of science but on the intelligent life or advanced life, the problem with what happens outside the scientific community is it's not a tabula rasa. It's not a blank slate. The popular culture, especially in the US ian (32:59.524) Hmm. ian (33:08.503) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (33:25.718) but almost everywhere now, is so primed for the fact that, A, it's already there and sure, and B, it's visited, and three, it's abducted some of our people, and four, it can make a list of all the conspiracy theories and wild ideas about alien life. And they're just so embedded in the popular culture that it's like that the fact of the existence of intelligent aliens has been amortized. It's sort of been, it's just already been built in. zack_jackson (33:39.8) Thank you. chris_impey (33:55.698) in to the culture. And so, you know, that would lead to a collective shrug. Well, sure, we knew that, you know, the government's been hiding this stuff from us for 70 years, since Roswell. So, you know, and now your astronomers are coming along and telling us, oh, it exists and you're all excited, really? Oh, come on, you know. So I think that's the larger cultural issue or problem or whatever, it's not a problem, it's just amusing to me. But as far as a religious reaction to this, and I'll say, zack_jackson (34:02.271) Hmm. rachael (34:04.421) Thank you. Bye. zack_jackson (34:05.05) Thank you. Bye. zack_jackson (34:12.722) Ha! chris_impey (34:25.698) the gate that I'm an agnostic, which my wife's a pretty hardcore atheist. And so she gives me a hard time about being agnostic. She thinks that's a kind of, it's a kind of wussy position to take. But I, and I argue with her, we argue vigorously about that one. I argue with her and I use the phrase that was attributed to Feynman. And I think he did say this in the biography of Richard Feynman, famous physicist. His biographer said, zack_jackson (34:43.45) Fantastic. chris_impey (34:55.738) Feynman believed in the primacy of doubt and that he held as a high scientific mark and doubt skepticism and doubt is a is a very high mark of a scientist. So I'm proud to wear that mantle of skepticism doubt of not being sure and being okay with not being sure. So I'm an agnostic but I do keep bad company and some of that bad company is Jesuits. Don't you know, don't don't go drinking with Jesuits. You'll you'll you'll end up in a rachael (34:59.461) Thank you. Bye. ian (35:13.024) Right. zack_jackson (35:14.092) Yeah. chris_impey (35:25.798) and a Rome gutter somewhere and they'll be they'll have got back home safely. With the Buddhists, the other group I hang out with, you don't have to worry about being drunk in a gutter because they really don't drink. They do bend the rules a bit, you know, I've seen them eat a lot of meat for people who are supposed to be vegans and vegetarians. But anyway, those are the two tribes that I've sort of affiliated myself with. And their reactions or perspectives on life in the universe is are quite different. They're interesting. Each the Buddhists that I've been with and I've read behind this of course and read some of their More you know the scholarly articles written about this It is completely unexceptional in their tradition to contemplate a universe filled with life That could be more advanced It could be human like or it could be more advanced or different from humans in also a vast universe with cycles of time and birth and and death of the universe and rebirth of other universes. So the Byzantine possibilities of life in the universe are pretty standard stuff for them and would not surprise them at all. They do get into more tricky issues when they come to define life itself, which biologists of course have trouble with, or sentience, which is also a tricky issue. But on the larger issue of the existence of life in the universe far beyond Earth, that's just non-controversial. zack_jackson (36:48.35) Hmm. chris_impey (36:55.898) to them and when I say that's what we anticipate and that's what scientists expect it's like okay sure and the Jesuits are in a different slightly different space they're of course in an unusual space as we know within the Catholic Church because they're you know they're the scholarly branch you know they're they're devoted to scholarship they from Gregory and the calendar reform they were liberated to measure ian (37:17.944) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (37:25.678) the heavens and then eventually that just segwayed smoothly into doing astronomy research. The Jesuits have been doing pretty straight up astronomical research since certainly the early 19th century, so quite a long time. And they have that sort of intellectual independence of being able to pursue those ideas. All the Jesuit astronomers I know, there are I think 11 or 12 in the Vatican Observatory and they all live the double life. They're all PhD astronomers. rachael (37:37.221) Thank you. chris_impey (37:55.798) with parishes. So it's not a problem. Whoever else, whoever elsewhere might think there's a conflict between science and religion, they don't see it. They don't feel it. And if you ask... Yeah. Yeah. ian (38:05.145) Mm-hmm. zack_jackson (38:06.03) No. And if anyone out there wants to hear more about that, they can listen to episode episode 113 with brother guy, the, uh, the director. Yeah. ian (38:10.246) We have an episode. chris_impey (38:13.821) Right. ian (38:15.343) Director of the Vatican Observatory. chris_impey (38:16.418) Sure, sure. So I've known guys since, well, since he was a grad student actually, and a long time. And yes, and so they, they're pursuing it from a scholarly direction. And for them, it's also uncontroversial that there would be life elsewhere. Now, what is the, you know, what does that do to God's creation when you imagine that Earth and humans are no longer the centerpiece of it? That's a more interesting question. zack_jackson (38:22.034) Wow. chris_impey (38:46.298) I've had debates about that. And I heard Jose Funes, who was the previous director of the Vatican Observatory and Argentinian astronomer, in a press conference actually in the Vatican City State when we had a conference on astrobiology. In response to a question about astrobiology, because that was what the conference was about, he gave a very interesting answer. He said he gave a parable of Christ in the flock of sheep and how there was the sheep that was lost. you know, you had to gather back to the rest of the flock. And he didn't complete the story, he just left it hanging there. And so you were left wondering, are we the lost sheep, you know, and the other, and all the intelligent aliens out there are the rest of the flock? And what's the message, you know? So he sort of almost muddied the waters with his little parable. But in the manner of how they view the universe, zack_jackson (39:27.914) Hmm. rachael (39:28.621) Thank you. Bye. zack_jackson (39:33.792) Hmm. chris_impey (39:46.398) the rules of physics. I used to teach a team graduate cosmology with Bill Staker, who is one of their tribe. Sadly, he died a few years ago. We teach cosmology and he's a relativist. He works on general relativity and the Big Bang and all that. And if I was just wanting to pull his leg at breakfast, we had breakfast before we taught us to organize ourselves. I could do one of two things. I could say, oh, Bill, physics, we got you with physics. is squeezed back to the first 10 to the minus 43 seconds. Got to the gaps, there it is, that's a little gap. And then physics owns the rest, you know. And then if I was really feeling frisky, I'd sort of, since he was a Catholic, I'd tease him about the three impossible things he has to believe every morning before breakfast. Virgin birth, resurrection, et cetera, you know. So I don't know how all those circles are squared truly because we've had, you know, I've had conversations. zack_jackson (40:22.572) Hmm. zack_jackson (40:26.32) Hehehehehe zack_jackson (40:35.05) Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. chris_impey (40:46.798) But I know that it's not a conflict or a tension or even a problem to imagine life in the universe and even intelligent life. So for neither of those two very different religious tribes, does it seem to be an issue? ian (41:06.443) So can you talk more about, especially how you got involved? Cause I think that science for the monks and nuns program was really interesting. And, you know, one, how you got involved, but you know, reading your book Humble Before the Void was just very interesting to kind of see about your experience from there. And you told us before we started recording that you wrote that after your first time going and that you've been there eight or nine times now. What has all of this been like for you? How has it had an impact on your work and also your personal life? if yes and what ways. chris_impey (41:38.798) Yeah, it was a sort of profound, it's been a profound experience since 2008, I guess, so it's almost 15 years and eight trips. So the first time was one of those great things of you come across the transom professionally. Sometimes I got a call from a colleague that I didn't know that well, who he knew I had an education, a good reputation as an educator. And he just called me, he's a postdoc at Berkeley actually, an environmental science postdoc. He said, how'd you like to go and teach the Dalai Lama's monks cosmology? And it's not a question you ruminate over or look at your skit, look at, oh, I'll check my calendar. Let me get back to you. No, you just say yes, and then you make it happen. So I said yes, and then it happened. And I was savvy enough in hindsight to take my 17-year-old Paul with me on that trip. And he'd never been anywhere out, he'd been to Europe a couple of times, but he'd never been to Asia or anywhere exotic. zack_jackson (42:14.65) Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha rachael (42:17.821) Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha zack_jackson (42:23.05) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (42:38.738) if you like. And so that was a profound trip in that sense. It was a bonding with your 17-year-old and you know, we were a little more adventurous together than either of us might have been on our own. And so the context was that invitation. And then I learned that his holiness the Dalai Lama, who famously has said in his autobiography that if he hadn't been selected at age four to be the of compassion would have been an engineer. Fine, that's an interesting statement to make. But, and it meant that when he was a child in Eastern Tibet, in a pretty primitive village, you know, he would just infuriate his parents by taking apart their clocks and mechanical devices and never quite putting them together again. So he had this analytic and mechanical and engineering and scientific mindset even as a child. And then of course his future was cast into the role he had zack_jackson (43:11.134) Hmm. zack_jackson (43:25.992) Hmm. chris_impey (43:38.798) he took. But he's always had that strong interest in science. So he looked around 20 or so years ago and realized that the monastic tradition, his, the Gelug tradition, of course, or other traditions in Buddhism, was sort of outdated. You know, the monastic training was extremely rigorous. They take years and years of rhetoric and philosophy and theology and comparative religion and all sorts of things. But there's very little science, very little math. And in the schools, there's zack_jackson (43:39.972) Bye. chris_impey (44:08.718) very little science and very little math. And he just thought that was unacceptable. He said, my monks and nuns, the nun part actually did come later. And that was a good part of his work to make the level of playing field for monastic training to include nuns. But he just said, these my monastics cannot be prepared for life in the 21st century if they don't have science and math. And so in the manner that he does these things, he just looked around and waved his arm and said, make this happen, you know, and I've now zack_jackson (44:19.05) Thank you. Thank you. zack_jackson (44:30.035) Yeah. zack_jackson (44:37.45) Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe chris_impey (44:38.798) heard from proximity to people in his orbit that his holiness, the Dalai Lama says a lot of things. He has great ideas. He's very activist. He's very visionary. And he says all sorts of things. And people scurry around and sometimes they just ignore him. Sometimes nothing happens. But this one, they decided to make it happen. And what happened was they looked around Dharamsala chris_impey (45:08.658) the blue, who was an educator and a scientist, a young scientist. And they just glommed on to him and they said, Hey, can you help us with this? Can you set something up? And so he set up the science for monks program, then science for monks and nuns. When the nuns came on board and I was one of the early people he called. And so the model was to bring three to four Western teachers in different subjects. The Dalai Lama's core interest. it doesn't mirror a bit his interests, which are evolutionary biology, neuroscience, physics, math, and then environmental sciences come on board too. So it's not every field of science. So these, we would come out as Western teachers and there'd be cohorts of monks and then monks and nuns, about 24 in a group. And we do three week intensive workshops and they're very intense, you know, we're in the classroom six, seven hours a day and then our evening sessions or observing zack_jackson (45:50.671) Hmm. chris_impey (46:08.658) telescopes. So it's kind of grueling actually, but it's inspiring as well. And eventually, the idea is that enough of the monks and nuns will be trained to be educators themselves, and you won't need to depend on Westerners to come out and do this. And they're not really there yet, but they could get there. I don't want them to get there, because then I won't get invited out. So it was a singular experience. And the book I wrote, of course, was fresh, zack_jackson (46:24.494) Hmm. chris_impey (46:38.738) I was really, I wrote it not long after the first trip. And to your question of did it affect me or change me? Well, yes, in many ways, some of which I probably haven't fully appreciated. I mean, first of all, it was a deep embedding in a culture, in a way that I'd never done. I was pretty experienced world traveler, but in that sort of slightly superficial way of someone who goes to Asia and tries to hang out and go to a bar in a local restaurant and see the sights, but you don't really get to know the people ian (47:05.228) Mm-hmm chris_impey (47:08.838) you're moving around. So being three weeks, sometimes four weeks, and then traveling with them afterwards or during, you know, really you get to learn the culture. You also see in these northern Indian towns, most of the workshops are in northern India, there's now in southern India, Bidtabhatta, Nepal for this too. They're mixing very well. India has a, you know, kind of black mark on it right now with its current government of sort of sectarian strife and Most recently with the Sikhs, but also obviously with Muslims But in those little northern Indian villages where there are sometimes 50 percent Buddhist 50 percent Hindus They really get on pretty well. I mean that they're just they're sort of under the radar the geopolitics or the What the Modi government is doing at the time so? It works pretty well, and it's nice to see that So I learned that I saw the culture up close. I would be part of their rituals and go, you know and ian (47:50.666) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (48:08.758) see everything they saw and listen to their prayers and talk to their scholars. And so it was a pretty deep embedding. And then as far as my own life, when I come back, rather than just view it as, you know, amazing experience, I got some beautiful photos. I had these great memories. Um, it did sort of make me reflect a little, uh, because of their, the ethos they had. And their ethos is, is of course very, um, very different from most of a Western ethos. It's a Buddhist are all about compassion and suffering, suffering and compassion. They do go together. They're almost bedfellows. So I got the message, I think very early on, when I was walking towards the lecture hall and it was at one of these Tibetan children villages and they're very poignant places. They're about 11 or maybe now 14 Tibetan children villages in the northern part of India. And that's where the refugees go. ian (48:46.008) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (49:09.158) that escaped. So almost all the monks in my early workshops left Tibet when they were teenagers even younger, brought across the ice fields by family members at great risk. Some didn't make it, others lost toes and fingers from frostbite. They had to go in the winter because the Chinese troops would intercept them and even even then did in the winter. So they were orphans, And they grow up and go to these Tibetan children villages, sort of orphanages, really. And so I was walking towards the lecture hall, which is situated in one of these villages. And there was a hard, scrabble, packed dirt soccer pitch. You know, it looked really uncomfortable for falling. I am enough of a Brit to have experienced playing football soccer on really nice grass, because England does have good grass, you know. And I was thinking, the first thing I thought, damn, I don't want to play football. rachael (50:04.321) Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ian (50:04.525) Right. zack_jackson (50:05.412) Hmm chris_impey (50:08.918) on that field. That would be brutal. So there was this football field and there was a 10-foot wall behind it running the length of the football field, painted white, and on top of it in 10-foot high letters was a slogan of the school, others before self. And I was just thinking, I wonder how many American high schools would have that as their slogan. How would that go down with the, you know, social media, me generation, whatever. rachael (50:10.621) Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ian (50:31.167) Right. rachael (50:31.321) Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha zack_jackson (50:32.25) Hmm ian (50:34.845) Yeah. chris_impey (50:38.918) So that was one thing. And then a series of those little messages sort of sink in about how they do operate differently from us or me. And so one thing it made me reflect on when I went back home was I immediately embedded back in my academic life and hustling the next grant and writing the next paper and talking to my collaborators. And I just realized how really how intensely pressured. rachael (50:40.763) Wow. chris_impey (51:08.658) Darwinian that science, Western science system is, it's kind of, you know, it kind of grinds you down. I mean, I've been hustling for grants from funding agencies for 40 years and I kind of burned out on it, you know, it's hard. It doesn't get any easier because there's younger whippersnappers that are very smart and, you know, they're going to get your grant. So it definitely made me reflect on the sort of hyper competitive nature of some parts of zack_jackson (51:21.042) Hmm. ian (51:21.047) Mm-hmm. rachael (51:28.721) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (51:39.719) and just reflect on what is important. Is it important to know something, or to teach something, or to give something, or to what is important? And how does that work when you're a scientist and educator? And that's it. Thank you for watching. I hope you enjoyed this video. I'll see you in the next one. Bye. ian (51:56.043) Yeah. Well, it's just interesting reading the book and I told you before we're recording. I've not been on to finish it yet, but I look forward to finish it just because, you know, one, you know, as I've already said, you're a fantastic writer for the lay audience, the general public, which is not something, you know, I've, I've worked with many scientists as a science educator and many of the ones I've worked with have said they struggle with that. Right. So I always applaud that. Um, but then just the, the personal experiences you shared and. chris_impey (51:59.833) I'm ian (52:26.163) humble before the void was just very interesting to me, especially someone who I have embraced meditation and mindfulness over the past three or four years and gotten really into it. And so, you know, first when I, when you shared that book with us and saw that the Dalai Lama wrote, you know, the preface for it and everything, I just was immediately fascinated because I find him to be absolutely fascinating in his perspective on things. So chris_impey (52:47.298) Yeah, I mean, I was, I mean, I've been privileged to meet him a couple of times. And, uh, and it's always, uh, a singular experience. Uh, the first time was that first trip out actually. And, and it was in that same Tibetan children village. And that was, this was in the winter. I was a January is a very, um, very difficult time to be there. It's in the foothills of the Himalayas. Quite high up. Dharamsala has trivial factoid that a Brit will appreciate like me. Um, It has the world's highest cricket stadium. And so drum solo, there you go. Now you know, when you get asked that, now you know. So we were in this auditorium, this cold auditorium, very cold, and they'd given the Westerners blankets, put over their legs, and even a few little heaters around. But it was brutal. And he was going to give an opening address. And everyone was full of excitement and anticipation. It was probably 2,000 people. But it was a cold, it was an unadorned Spartan auditorium ian (53:20.331) Oh. zack_jackson (53:20.594) Hmm. Ha ha ha. ian (53:25.403) Exactly. zack_jackson (53:34.892) Hmm. chris_impey (53:47.498) on a below freezing day in the Himalayas. And along that football field outside, which is the way his little, he has the equivalent of a pokemobile, he has the DL mobile or whatever that he comes into a place with, that he was gonna come along the edge of the field. And I'd seen walking in that the school children were starting to assemble in a long row along the side of the football field along the place his vehicle would come. And we were waiting zack_jackson (54:01.775) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (54:17.258) He was late and it was so cold and it was quiet. People were murmuring, nothing was happening. And then suddenly we heard this sound, this wave of singing. So they were singing him in as his vehicle arrived. And I was like, wow, that was so cool. Just the sound of that. And then he came and he just radiates when he's in a room. And he's a little frail. He had trouble getting up the three steps onto the stage. But his grin is just... Oh, it's just... anyone who remelt the hardest heart. He's just so... and his comments are always, you know, they're always kind of offhand and insightful and, you know, he has a very interesting and sensibility. So that's been a remarkable thing. But the monks all had their own insights and I learned a lot from them. I mean, I was teaching them but I was learning a lot from them. And they gave me, you know, when you teach, well, the other thing I didn't say about the ian (55:12.667) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (55:17.418) experience there, which was also restorative for me, is, you know, I depend on my high tech gadgets and my PowerPoints and my whatever. And I was pretty much warned. I said, you're going to be pretty much off the grid. And it was almost like that. And there were a couple of workshops where, you know, if the cold water, if the water was hot, you were lucky. If the power stayed on all day in the classroom, you were lucky. There was hardly any equipment. We make these, these runs rachael (55:25.325) Hmm. chris_impey (55:47.278) These equipment runs down to the local bazaar, and we buy matchsticks and cloth and cardboard and foil and just super primitive ingredients to make experiments back in the classroom, rather than bring stuff out from the West. So you had to improvise, and it was good to do that. It was good to have to lecture and talk and use simple analogies and simple equipment. And so they informed me about that, too, because I wondered how they understood zack_jackson (56:02.75) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (56:17.278) these very abstract things of physics and cosmology. And I think the first striking little insight I had, because I was always reaching for a good analogy. And then, so I sort of turned the tab
Episode 120 Today we are joined by Dr Emily Smith to talk about epidemiology, the dangers of truth telling, and how the story of the Good Samaritan changed everything for her. She is an assistant professor in the department of emergency medicine/surgery at Duke University and at the Duke Global Health Institute (DGHI). During the COVID-19 pandemic, she became known as the Friendly Neighbor Epidemiologist through her social media outlets which reached over 10 million people in 2020-2021. She continues posting on the social account and her Substack blog with a monthly reach of 2-4 million. Her work has been featured in TIME Magazine, NPR, the Washington Post, Christianity Today, and Baptist News Global. Before joining the faculty at Duke University, she spent four years at Baylor University in the department of public health and was a research scholar at DGHI for two years. She received her Ph.D. in epidemiology from the Gillings School of Global Public Health at UNC Chapel Hill and a MSPH from the University of South Carolina. She has been married to her pastor-husband for 20 years and they have two fantastic children, one spoiled golden retriever and a new very-friendly golden doodle puppy. Her debut book, The Science of the Good Samaritan: Thinking Bigger About Loving Our Neighbors, released on Oct. 24, 2023 from Zondervan. I'm very excited to welcome Dr. Emily Smith to the show today. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis AI Generated Transcript Ian (00:04.911) Okay. So our guest today is an assistant professor in the department of emergency medicines surgery at Duke university and at the Duke global health Institute. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she became known as the friendly neighbor epidemiologist through her social media outlets, which reached over 10 million people in 2020 and 2021. She continues posting on the social account and her sub stack blog with a monthly reach of two to 4 million people. Her work has been featured in Time Magazine, NPR, The Washington Post, Christianity Today, and Baptist News Global. Before joining the faculty at Duke University, she spent four years at Baylor University in the Department of Public Health and was a research scholar at DGHI for two years. She received her PhD in epidemiology from the Gillings School of Global Public Health at UNC Chapel Hill and MSPH from the University of South Carolina. She's been married to her pastor husband for 20 years and they have two fantastic children. one spoiled golden retriever and a newly and a new very friendly golden doodle puppy. Her debut book, the science of the good Samaritan thinking bigger, bigger about loving our neighbors released on October 24th, 2023. I'm very excited to welcome Dr. Emily Smith to the show today. Emily Smith (01:15.144) I'm very excited to welcome you all. Thank you for having me. It's a pleasure to be here for sure. Ian (01:21.518) Yeah. Um, as I was saying before we started recording, you know, I've found you because of your Facebook account and was just always amazed, obviously with your expertise in the science and, um, everything you were sharing, but also your lens as an evangelical Christian. Um, I thought that was really fascinating and trying to work with those two communities, right? Trying to kind of be a boundary, uh, spanning individual for that. But I think before we really get into that. Emily Smith (01:43.734) Yeah. Ian (01:50.162) I would love for you to just kind of talk to us a little bit about what drew you to epidemiology. Emily Smith (01:56.476) Yes, and prior to the pandemic, I don't think a lot of people knew what that word meant. By the way, it's seven syllables, and so throw that into a Thanksgiving meal or something if you need a big word to kind of wow family with. But, you know, people would get us confused with skin doctors, like epidermis instead of epidemics, or entomology, which I think is bugs, right? Yeah, it's just another really big E word. I don't know. So now... Zack Jackson (02:00.95) Ha ha ha. Ian (02:19.548) It is. Yes. Zack Jackson (02:19.756) Yeah. Emily Smith (02:26.068) People know kind of what we are and who we're about just because we've all come out of the pandemic. So if you need the nerdy, jeopardy definition of what that is, before I get into how I got into the field, is the distribution and determinants of disease. And so what makes a disease spread and who is at risk? I tend to say, you know, clinicians and nurses and dentists, they... focus on one-on-one patients at a time, and we focus on one community or population level at a time, so the aggregate of a lot of individuals. I grew up in a tiny town in Eastern New Mexico, 10 miles from the Texas border, so it is West Texas culture, flat land, great sunsets and oil fields, and really good people. But it was a really small town and a lovely town. And I just was always loved science. My eighth grade science teacher started talking about DNA and y'all would have thought he was talking about Beyonce or something. I was just like, what is this? And it's magic. And so he gave me a college textbook. This is as nerdy as it gets. Now it's kind of cool to be a nerd back then in the 90s. I guarantee it was not near as cool to wear glasses. Yeah. Zack Jackson (03:44.687) Ugh. Right? Emily Smith (03:48.5) So he, and I read it, I read it on a band trip, which is like double nerd points. But I just loved science and math. I don't know what it was, but he hooked me up with the first female scientist that I had ever met at Texas Tech University. And I started doing a science fair project with her in high school, because there really wasn't the capacity to do anything like that, you know, at my traditional high school, because it was too small. Ian (03:48.514) Mm-hmm. Emily Smith (04:16.668) And so I still thought I'm going to do something in science, but I had also grown up in the church and our family hosted a lot of missionaries that came into our church. And so I heard their stories. They were very gracious to listen to an eight-year-old, nine-year-old little questions about the world and their adventures. So early on, I knew I wanted to do, I thought I wanted to be a missionary and I still just love the science. And so I went to church. The natural way to do that is go pre-med. I kind of thought the only way to do that is through medical school, so let's just do that. So I did, I chose medical school as a goal and took the MCAT, I got into med school, got married straight out of college to my pastor husband, and his first job in the church was all the way across the country in South Carolina. So I had a gap year. Ian (04:50.218) Mm. Zack Jackson (04:50.222) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (05:13.506) Hmm. Emily Smith (05:15.872) And I, I mean, I'm just a nerd, so I decided let's just get another degree because it's what we do when we have a gap year, right? Yeah, I mean, yeah, a lot of people might as well. Yeah. And it was in public health because I thought it'd look good for medical school. Day one of epidemiology, my professor, who was really just inspirational anyways, he did the jeopardy definition of epi. But then he said, this is a... Ian (05:22.764) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (05:23.932) Right. Ian (05:25.748) Not as well. Emily Smith (05:44.192) This is an equity science because most of the time we're gonna be working at people who are on the margins in these communities that are marginalized for health or poverty. And growing up in the church, it just clicked in my mind that that's the science of the Good Samaritan. It's quantifying the people who are most at need and then choosing not to walk by. So I didn't go to medical school, went to PhD in Epi instead and history from there. But I... I also remember going to my first mission trip on the Mercy Ship to Honduras. And when the doctors were focusing one-on-one on these people who had traveled a very long way to get to care, I was naturally asking the bigger picture questions about poverty or why this community has such high rates of... you know, diabetes or surgical needs when others didn't. And those are inherently epi questions. I just didn't know it at the time. Ian (06:45.983) That's interesting. Zack Jackson (06:48.766) Yeah. So you mentioned this is the science of the Good Samaritan, which is, uh, the title of your newly released book. Congratulations. Has that been a story that has that clicked with you then, or is this more of a recent connecting of the dots? Has this story been in, in your heart and mind this whole time? Ian (06:48.776) Yeah. Emily Smith (06:52.662) Yeah. Emily Smith (06:58.037) Thank you. Emily Smith (07:10.172) Oh, the whole time, for sure. I love that story of the Good Samaritan. And a lot of people are familiar with it, even if you're not of the Christian faith. You know, it's that story of where there's a man on the side of the road who is very sick. I mean, sick enough, hurt enough, where he can't help himself. And two people walk by. Jesus is telling this story, by the way. And those people are noted as religious leaders. And so they're kind of the people who... Ian (07:11.913) Okay. Emily Smith (07:38.504) represent power and privilege of the day, but there's one person who actually stopped who's the Samaritan. And in that time, that would have been not who you expected to be highlighted in a story. They typically do not have the places of power or privilege in the religious time of the day, but he stopped and he helped the man. And not only that, he helped him, he bandaged him up, he took him to a place to recover, and then he paid for all of it. And it's just a holistic view of what helping, you know, true solidarity and helping means. So I think that story just growing up in the church has always very much resonated with me wanting to do missions. But then when I got into EPPE, it resonated on a scientific level. Ian (08:26.198) Interesting. I love how at the very beginning of the book, you know, you have all those little quotes before you get into the reading itself and, you know, talking, you know, from Mark, uh, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. And then you kind of go into, you know, well, this is what health is the greatest of gifts from Buddhism, perform all work carefully guided by compassion from Hinduism. Then you go on with Islam, Judaism, and then you end, which I thought was really sweet with your kid. Emily Smith (08:32.139) Yeah. Emily Smith (08:52.885) Yeah. Ian (08:54.418) love your neighbor, that's just being a good human. That really resonated with me because I'm actually teaching a science and religion class at UNC Charlotte. And I wanted it to be not a science and Christianity class. I wanted it to focus on multiple religions. And so I'm doing it for the first time. And what, I mean, yes, this is coming more from a Christian lens, but what made you even include all of that in there? Because I thought that was really interesting. Emily Smith (08:57.041) Yeah. Emily Smith (09:04.756) Yeah. Emily Smith (09:24.344) Yes, one of my biggest fears about releasing this book is it being misconstrued as a Christian faith book and making that the center of all faiths. I work with all faiths. I work in predominantly Muslim countries. I've definitely worked with all faiths during the pandemic, but then that quote with my kid at the end. You know, you don't have to be of any faith to just want to be a good human. He said that during the pandemic when he didn't understand why so many people were angry at me. Cause he lived through it. They heard and saw different things too. And so he just couldn't understand why being a good human wasn't just the top of the list for everybody. So I didn't want this book to come out even unconsciously. Zack Jackson (10:06.053) Ugh. Emily Smith (10:22.472) making people feel like you have to be of the Christian faith. That's the center of the world or the center of all faiths. Cause it's just not, there are gorgeous expressions of faith or non-faith or just being a good human around. And I wanted to be very careful in that. Also, when you read the book, you'll see that Christianity has been poorly centered for the sake of conquest or colonialism or We see it even nowadays right here in America of we need to put the 10 commandments back in a courthouse or say a prayer before football games, but that's just a Christian prayer that's not inclusive of all. And I did not wanna be one of those people that even unconsciously said you have to be a Christian because I just, I don't think you do. You're beautiful people in the world. So thank you for talking about that. It was important to start the book for me with that. Zack Jackson (10:54.766) Hmm. Ian (11:15.5) Yeah. Emily Smith (11:19.176) kind of foundation. Zack Jackson (11:21.474) Hmm. Ian (11:22.014) Yeah, I thought that, like I said, it just really resonated with me and it probably because I'm coming from the lens of the class I'm teaching. Um, you know, I am a Christian Episcopalian, but I have always been very curious and fascinated by other religious traditions and I just love learning about them. Um, and so I love that you had that in there. And I just remember right away, just running to my wife, being like, Oh, look at this. And, um, so. Emily Smith (11:28.681) Yeah. Emily Smith (11:39.232) Yeah. Emily Smith (11:45.628) Yeah, well and I also didn't want to proselytize even some unconsciously. It's just I'm not a sneak attack Christian and I don't want to view people as projects. You know, I think the evangelical church has done a really bad job at that. And it's just not in my wheelhouse. I wanted to make that very clear. Zack Jackson (11:52.523) Mm. Ian (12:02.825) Mm-hmm. Ian (12:08.787) Yeah. Zack Jackson (12:09.006) Sneak attack Christians. That's such a good phrase. That... Ian (12:11.955) It is. Emily Smith (12:13.508) People are people, not projects. Ian (12:15.56) Yeah. Zack Jackson (12:15.734) Yeah. Oh man, I got to get that on cross stitch somewhere in my house. Emily Smith (12:19.828) There you go! I like that. Ian (12:22.422) So you in here, you know, not everyone who's listening has read the book yet, but what made you decide when the pandemic started? What made you decide to create your friendly neighbor epidemiologist? Emily Smith (12:38.716) Yeah, and you know, I was at two conferences right when Wuhan was starting to ramp up in March, 2020. And we, this is our training, this is our lane. You know, this is our day to really step in and go for it. So once we saw, and when I say we, I say public health and epidemiologists, we saw how this new virus was acting and what was happening. A lot of us paid attention pretty, significantly to what was happening. Cause what was, it was different than Ebola. You know, Ebola is awful. And hopefully we'll talk about where I talk about that chapter in the book. But when someone is sick and contagious, you kind of know it. Cause it's really horrific in visual. With this, it looked like it was COVID or well, well we weren't even calling it COVID at the time. Whatever was happening. maybe people were spreading it before they even knew they were infectious and contagious. And so it could catch a lot of people off guard. My day job here at Duke is also working with health equity communities around the world in very poor countries where they're affected daily by bad access to healthcare, poverty. And so if this really was going to be the pandemic that people have been predicting for years. the margins were gonna be affected the most. So everything in me was just kind of like rising of uh-oh. So I get home and a lot of people were asking questions of what does flatten the curve mean? Do we need to buy a billion rolls of toilet paper? And the answer was always no. Oh, bye. I know, and don't hoard, that's just classic America, isn't it? But also there was a lot. Ian (14:23.158) People did it anyway though, yeah. Ian (14:29.416) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (14:30.951) Yeah. Emily Smith (14:32.412) And I, I re we all remember, I mean, this is a real fear. I do want to honor that of people who are high risk, the elderly, you know, do I need to be scared basically. And I wanted to calm fears, but not squash them because it was scary. So I decided why not, why don't I just start a Facebook page for the handful of real life neighbors that I had and like my family. Really, I mean, it was just very, very genetic, generic, not genetic. So I named it Friendly because I tend to be too friendly. Like if I sit by you on an airplane, I'm very sorry. Um, cause I, I'm, I really am anyways, it's just who I am. And I'm trying to accept that, but neighbor because of the good Samaritan story, I knew that COVID in particular was going to imply that we needed to neighbor one another well. We were going to have to take care of the margins. There's going to be a lot of solidarity of staying home for those that couldn't. Get the vaccines for those where it would not work. There just was a lot of neighboring that was going to take place. So I named it because of that. I'm also a pastor's wife. So I thought this is going to be prime time for the church, the Big C Church to be the church. And I say that, I know listeners can't hear it, but I say that with a smile, not as sarcasm, but I was so idealistic at, I really thought this was gonna be our time to shine and take care, you know, live, love thy neighbor really out in full blown faith. So I named it Friendly Neighbor Epidemiologist. And the only people that followed at the beginning were real life people that I knew. And then when the pandemic, Ian (16:13.408) Yeah. Emily Smith (16:23.676) started shifting. We all saw this when it became weirdly political. When national leaders started talking about it as the China virus or these othering type, I was going, what is happening? That is not the faith that I ascribe to. And then when it became, you know, faith that were fear, we started hearing that and people started saying that instead of wearing a mask. I was like, you have not read Galatians five in the Bible. Ian (16:37.314) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (16:47.15) Hmm. Emily Smith (16:53.192) You might say faith over fear, but that's not true faith. So I started posting about that too, from this perspective of pure science and then weaving in the faith part to try to help people anchor in a different way than perhaps they were able to anchor at their own churches. And that seemed to resonate with a lot of people for good and bad ways. So then it started going viral. George Floyd was murdered. And I talked... Zack Jackson (17:18.55) Hmm. Emily Smith (17:22.724) into that conversation at, especially in the white church, there's a difference between all lives matter and black lives matter and why that distinction is important. People couldn't understand. So it'd go viral for that. And I wasn't doing this to go viral. I don't actually think I was noticing what was happening because I was just busy writing and daily posting. And then the Capitol riot happened and I wrote about that one and that one really kind of exploded. Zack Jackson (17:29.91) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (17:47.906) Hmm. Emily Smith (17:53.748) So that's how I got into it. I'm sure we can talk about the nuances, but that's how it initially started. Ian (17:59.362) And you alluded to, you know, your children seeing the things being said about you and everything. What surprised you most as it started going viral with the reactions? Like, because you, you share some things in here and that were really challenging to read and you in there though, even said that, um, I will not share everything. And so I just, I can't imagine. Emily Smith (18:13.341) Yeah. Emily Smith (18:19.457) Really? Ian (18:30.134) the pain you went through and, but you, I love that you embraced your vulnerability with that because I also, I'll be honest. Yes, I, I am a Christian, but there are many times, especially over the last several years, and Zach knows this very well that I have a really hard time saying I'm a Christian because of the extreme baggage that comes with it. But I feel like if I say it, I have to qualify it really. And yeah, we had Brian McLaren on, um, Emily Smith (18:47.032) Oh, for sure. Yeah. Yes. Zack Jackson (18:47.054) Mm-hmm. Emily Smith (18:53.98) Oh, absolutely. Ian (18:58.342) last, what, May of 22. And we talked a lot about it then as well, because it just the extreme hate that I felt like we were seeing that, I guess, has always been there. But now is more acceptable to be said. And so I'm just curious, you are I've never been a member of an evangelical Christian community in that way. And so I'm just curious what surprised you the most or if you don't mind sharing some of that. Emily Smith (19:00.52) Nice. Emily Smith (19:26.896) Yeah, yes and that you know this portion of the book the book is separated into three different sections centering cost and courage um had to be three c's like a good Baptist I guess but that middle section is the thank you for that or evangelical I grew up charismatic and married a Baptist pastor and now we go to a liturgical church so I'm not sure what I am at this point. Did you? Zack Jackson (19:39.138) Yes. Zack Jackson (19:46.531) same. Ian (19:51.925) Yeah. Zack Jackson (19:52.466) I grew up charismatic and went to a Baptist seminary and married my wife there. And then now I'm a part of a mainline denomination. So look, I'm there with you. Emily Smith (20:01.976) Maybe that's just a natural. There's a lot of us out there. Maybe that's a progression. Yeah. Are you? Yeah, I have to figure out where to, like the call and response, do I say the bold or not? Because I would get it wrong or stand and sit. I just get it wrong a lot, but whatever. The church is fine about it. So the middle cost section is the shortest part of the book. Zack Jackson (20:05.174) Yeah. I'm seeing it more and more. Yeah. Ian (20:06.559) Yeah. Emily Smith (20:27.492) It was by far the hardest to write and the hardest to read on the audio. I read the audio book and when I was recording it, I realized the, these chapters still feel so messy. Um, and it's because I just couldn't do more. I couldn't get it. I couldn't package it in a way that some of the other chapters felt pretty and tidy and bowed up. And anyways, it feels like there's a lot of ums and ohs in that chapter because it is incredibly painful. Zack Jackson (20:39.075) Hmm. Emily Smith (20:57.472) We were in Texas at the time. We were in the belly of the beast, that kind of feels like, of Waco, Texas. Great, great people there. But also the buckle of the Bible belt, probably the latch of the buckle. So what surprised me is when I started talking more and more about faith over fear, we started getting little trickles. I say we. I started getting little trickles of pushback from that online. And, you know, it's horrific stuff. It's not, I mean, you get called names and people, you know, you can put that aside. But when I started getting pictures of people sending pictures of guns and Holocaust imagery to me and saying awful things about my children, you know, threats against them, it became very real. Zack Jackson (21:45.762) Hmm. Emily Smith (21:53.5) And then one day in the middle of it, my husband came in and brought in a letter that was in our mailbox that was written in black and red marker. And it was an awful threat. And it was laced with, you know, you're part of the mark of the beast and a lot of these religious overtones, which I had heard and received for months at that point, but not in my mailbox. I mean, that is when it became too crazy. Zack Jackson (22:11.894) Oof. Ian (22:17.771) Mm-hmm. Emily Smith (22:22.732) close. You know, there's a cost that was to me, but then this was going to be a cost to the whole family and to the church, to our church. We ended up leaving the faith community. That not all faith, but that one. Some of the worst threats and harassment I got were people from within my own neighborhood or people that I worshiped with. Those are the ones that I won't share because I just can't talk about it yet. Zack Jackson (22:45.451) Mm. Emily Smith (22:51.676) The book is not a COVID book because I can't talk about it for 200 pages, nor do I think people want to read about it. The cost was awful because we couldn't let our kids go walk in around the neighborhood without one of us. They had safe homes that they could go in if they ever felt scared. They don't know why we were saying that. We just said, if there's a rainstorm, run to these five homes or Ian (22:58.166) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (23:00.579) Hmm. Ian (23:11.19) Hmm. Ian (23:19.49) Mm-hmm. Emily Smith (23:20.488) and they still don't know that. And that's very tender for me as a mom to have to hold. And two, at that time, it was also feeling like I was losing a foundation of faith because I grew up with Sandy Patty, Michael W. Smith, Bethel worship, I mean, come on now, really good, yeah. All of that evangelical stuff. And I remember watching the prayer rally that happened in November, 2020, and I'm sure, Zack Jackson (23:39.222) Yes. Emily Smith (23:49.32) you guys watched it as well, you know, on the Capitol steps, Michael W. Smith is there, Franklin Graham, I mean, these, it was a massive thousands of people rally. And this was also at the height of that first surge before vaccines. So my soul could not reconcile how that was standing on faith when I put the number in the book of how many died that day, but it was at the peak of the deaths in the US, like morgue trucks. you know, scenarios. I couldn't, I just couldn't reconcile like, so I felt like we were losing our faith community, losing jobs, you know, or leaving jobs, losing real life friends. And then these foundations that I had just anchored in were, I was just losing that as well. So it's just difficult. I do wish Ian (24:19.915) Mm-hmm. Emily Smith (24:45.556) that I could have shielded my family from some of that and just taken more of the brunt of it. But it's just part of the, you know, it's part of the cost of us as a family. And I wanted to put some of that vulnerability in because I think a lot of people, especially from the faith communities, have lost a lot. Or Thanksgiving's and Christmases have been very hard and are still hard. I just get that. Ian (24:55.126) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (24:55.138) Hmm. Zack Jackson (25:09.826) Hmm. Emily Smith (25:12.552) At the same time, it's the tip of the iceberg of what I did put in there. So I wanted to be careful to not put too much just cause I couldn't talk about it. Ian (25:20.235) Yeah. Zack Jackson (25:22.156) Yeah. Ian (25:22.61) When I appreciate, like I said, I appreciate, I I'm someone who embraces vulnerability. Um, and you know, I really love Brene Brown's work around that too. But I very much appreciated you sharing that with all of us and the readers because I just, it was tough. It was tough to read and, um, but I admire that you continued to work a lot. You know, I really appreciate that too, because Emily Smith (25:31.197) Yeah, for sure. Emily Smith (25:48.926) Yeah. Ian (25:52.438) You are still continuing to do what you can to save lives. Emily Smith (25:57.94) Well, and that was a choice. I mean, there was a point in there where a couple of the threats, I mean, we were working with high up authorities at certain parts of it. And I just asked my husband, do we need to just stop? Do I need to, well, do I need to stop basically? Cause I would, I would have just pulled all of it. It was not worth having a child, having one of my kids hurt or worse. And so we took a little bit of a break there in the middle of it to kind of discern and use wisdom and then I just decided to keep going with certain parameters in place of Some cameras and Authorities and some backup plans also Some boundaries around what I would or wouldn't stay who I would or wouldn't listen to I got asked to come on Far right like Breitbart type podcast and just I automatically just saying no to that. I mean, that's just a boundary. So it was a it was a choice to keep going. But it was also at a cost. I mean, that was before I got sick in 2021. My body just said no more. And I just had a I don't know if it's a thunderclap or just a massive migraine never had it before. And it just put me in bed for 15 months. So it Ian (27:23.838) Yeah, that reading that was tough too. I, yeah. And I just, because it just, I felt like your pain that you were experiencing, at least some of it was coming across, which again, I, I appreciated that a lot. Um, and I have a very dear friend of mine that was in my PhD program with that deals with migraines. I don't think she deals with them as much anymore. This was, you know, back between 2004 to 2008, but I knew right before she started the PhD program, Zack Jackson (27:24.148) Ugh. Emily Smith (27:26.952) Was it? Yeah. Emily Smith (27:38.125) Yeah. Ian (27:52.266) she would have them where she would be bedridden for like a month or something like that. And just, I couldn't imagine what that was like, but even, you know, I know I asked you how things are going now with you and your family and you told us prior to recording that things are getting better. And, and, but again, you made the choice to continue trying to save lives. Like I think that's very admirable. And so I, that's one of the reasons why I was so excited to get you here. Emily Smith (27:54.74) Yeah. Oh, for sure. Ian (28:20.934) And to read your book because that truly is admirable because you know, I have faced hateful things just because of stuff I do with science and religion for a long time now, nothing compared to what you've done. But there have been plenty of times where I've thought, I can't, I'm not doing this anymore. Like, it's just not worth it. Um, and it was nowhere near to the scale of what you have experienced. And so I just, I think it gives a lot of people hope. And I just wanted to make sure you knew that. Emily Smith (28:37.333) Yeah. Zack Jackson (28:37.559) Yeah. Emily Smith (28:45.052) Yeah, well thank you. There was also a scrappy piece of me that did not want to let them win. And because there were there were months of being bedridden in an incredibly dark room, I mean laughing would send me to weeks of a migraine that no amount of medicine, including hospital type medicine, would touch. Ian (28:55.039) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (28:55.313) Hmm Emily Smith (29:11.484) And so I, there was a little bit of a fight in me too. I just, I was so terrified that was gonna be the rest of my life. And I was doing everything possible to get out of it. And so now that I've come out of it a little bit more, the tenacity, the scrappiness to keep going means not only did like the bad people, they did not win, but also living into probably who, I am more of myself now than I have ever been because of it, because I'm a whole lot braver and courageous than I thought was actually in me. So thank you for saying that, because I think we hear stories of overcoming something and it looks like it was an overnight thing and you just believed your way out of it. And this is not the prosperity gospel. It is really difficult stuff. Zack Jackson (29:43.149) Mm. Zack Jackson (30:00.311) Hahaha! Zack Jackson (30:04.023) now. Emily Smith (30:08.7) you know, just day by day, I'm just doing, I'm just so grateful to be doing my job again. Ian (30:14.475) Yeah. Ian (30:18.07) Zach, did you have anything to add? Just, yeah. It's just, it's very inspirational, so thank you. Emily Smith (30:23.693) Thank you. Zack Jackson (30:25.222) Oh, you remind me of Julian of Norwich, my favorite dead Christian. Um, are you familiar with her story at all? Yeah. How she, uh, asked, asked Jesus for, uh, an encounter as close to death as possible so she could get to the heart of things and then to come back and be able to share that and the amount of revelation she encountered on those dark nights in that bed, um, changed her. Emily Smith (30:28.618) Yeah. Emily Smith (30:32.574) Yes. Emily Smith (30:35.892) Oh, for sure. Yes, I am. Zack Jackson (30:54.31) and really clarify the rest of her life. And I'm hearing that a lot from you as well. That's beautiful. Emily Smith (31:03.592) Yeah, she was probably a little bit more full of faith in the bed. I was just like, what is happening and I want out. Zack Jackson (31:14.283) Yes, but when she says, yeah, when she says all will be well and all will be well and all manner of things shall be well, she's saying it from that bed. And so it actually means something instead of the sort of, you know, pithy platitudes that you would see on a bumper sticker or a greeting card. And so when you talk about it and you talk about hope and change and good things, I feel, I believe it more. Emily Smith (31:14.842) This is not okay. Emily Smith (31:33.113) For sure. Yeah. Zack Jackson (31:42.262) you know, because you've been through the flames. One of the things that I found Emily Smith (31:42.724) Yeah, that passage in particular that she said is, oh go ahead, there was a little, I was saying one of the things about that passage that you just quoted, that's what my husband would tell me just nearly daily during those really dark times, all shall be well and all, yeah all of that. So that's very special. Zack Jackson (31:53.025) Nope, go ahead. Zack Jackson (32:09.542) Yeah, that's my mantra. I repeat to myself almost a daily basis. Emily Smith (32:14.963) Yes. Zack Jackson (32:17.75) Yeah. One of the things that surprised me in reading some of your work, when I hear about epidemiology, I think of, well, that's spread of disease, clearly. But that's such a small part of your book and a small part of your writing. And I'm reading about gun violence and systemic racism and injustices and economics and... all kinds of things that have nothing to do with disease? Am I reading epidemiology wrong as a study or is it that this is all just a part of how your heart works? Emily Smith (33:03.692) probably a both and of that. But epidemiology is not just the pandemic, epidemic, you know, disease detective type stuff that they make movies of. It's that, but it's also anything that affects a certain group of people differently than another group of people. And so that could be, you know, in my work, that's poverty and children's health. It could be who is affected the most by congenital Zack Jackson (33:05.687) Hmm Emily Smith (33:33.356) chronic type condition. So it's a really broad field than just disease detectives. Zack Jackson (33:41.376) Okay. Ian (33:41.378) All right. Well, so, and I remember your chapter, Trickle Up Economics. And so I'll be honest, Emily, there are so many, like I've now been putting like little markers in here, but I've folded down so many pages that I can't get, oh sorry, I can't get to everything I wanna say. So you made something and I can't find everything again because I just, I have comments on almost every single page. Emily Smith (34:03.124) Oh Zack Jackson (34:09.218) We'll leave a link in the description. Emily Smith (34:09.484) Oh yay! I'm gonna hang your reference business. Thank you. Ian (34:10.414) And your references in the end and stuff. And especially, so, you know, I'm also a fellow academic. And so I just was pulling your references. And I was like, oh my gosh, this is so amazing, honey. And just, and also too, I started down like the anti-racism journey. And I think 2016. And so some of the things I was aware of, but it was nice to also reread it and stuff, but that the chapter on trickle up economics, when you talk about, um, the question you ask us is, do you want to know the main factor per Emily Smith (34:15.613) Yes. Emily Smith (34:26.858) Oh yeah. Ian (34:40.302) Uh, predicted. Do you want to know what main factor predicted descending into poverty and not being able to climb back out, even when you account for everything else and it was having a child who needed surgery, which I was not at all surprised. Obviously it was health related, but that part and the part I'm trying to remember too, is that just for the communities in Somaliland or was that just also applicable worldwide? Emily Smith (34:50.57) Yeah. Emily Smith (35:06.176) it's applicable worldwide that look like, I mean the margins countries, you know, the poorest countries for sure. Yeah, yeah, and that, um, that was not something that we expected either. You know, in my day job, I work in communities like in Somaliland, which is the fourth poorest country of the world, on children who need surgical care. And so we know there's a group of kiddos who can get to, you know, a hospital when they need it. Ian (35:08.17) Okay. Right, yeah. Okay. Emily Smith (35:34.752) there's a whole slew of them that can't for reasons that are not their fault, nor their family's fault. That's the structure system, systemic racism, structural violence type stuff that happens. So we had been working with our community partners within the country for starting in 2016, trying to map out in the country, where are the kids who need the greatest care? How far do they have to travel? I mean, it is hours and hours and hours on wheelbarrows and stuff that is just not equity. It's just not what we would want for our children by a landslide. And then we started teasing the data. This is part of epidemiology that I love is you start with the margins and then you go further in to get the truth of the story. Cause that's what laws and legislations are built on, policies. And we found that There were a group of families in Somaliland that went into poverty because of something and never came out. There were some that were able to climb out of poverty. We see this in the US, right? Someone goes to the ER. If you have an insurance or a nest egg or family members that could chip in, it's going to be a huge expense. Some go into poverty and can come out and others can't. So in Somaliland, that's what happened. And we started looking at those families at what was different about them than the rest of them. I thought it was gonna be the income level of the family or the number of kiddos that they had to feed, but it was having a kid with surgical care. And so we took that to the United Nations as a policy effort in 2019. There was a big summit there for universal health coverage. And it's asking the question of what basically is going to be covered under a universal health coverage package. We know it's going to be vaccines and taking care of the sniffles, you know, primary care stuff. But what about surgery? Because that is what is impoverishing people. So we went to make that statement. And the chapter is about starting with the stories of the margin and then trickle your way back up. Emily Smith (37:48.976) instead of the whole trickle-down capitalism type where you put, you know, a hundred dollars in Jeff Bezos mailbox and you hope it reaches the poorest of the poor in inner Detroit. So it was a very, it was really interesting finding for me, but it also linked the story, their story, hopefully to policy change at the highest levels. Zack Jackson (38:00.546) Hmm. Ian (38:10.634) Yeah. Well, I've always said that I, I think it's, um, shameful that our country, which is the richest country, I believe in the history of the world, that anyone in this country could ever go into poverty because of healthcare or that people are in poverty, but still there's so many things there, right? But that healthcare can make people go bankrupt. I, Emily Smith (38:29.96) and we're the number one. Yeah. Ian (38:39.958) will never understand that with the amount of money and wealth in this one country that that's possible. It just is absolutely mind boggling to me. And then of course it elsewhere, right? I mean, you talk about in this chapter of like the wealth of like the 10 richest people or whatever the number was and what that could do for those countries in the margins, right? But even the margins in our own country. Um, and I just, I found that Emily Smith (38:49.696) Yeah. Emily Smith (38:59.509) Yeah. Emily Smith (39:04.64) Right. Ian (39:08.35) Uh, really interesting. I was really grateful that you went that route with that chapter because I thought it was just so important to see. Emily Smith (39:14.696) Right, and I think that that's where our centering is wrong because this story of medical impoverishment, healthcare impoverishment is in the Bible too. You know, the story of the bleeding woman who had spent her last resort was to go to find Jesus because she had spent all of her money for years trying to get care. And then she touches the hem of his garment to try to be incognito and he stops the crowd for her. Like his center. His majority, his view was not the crowd. It was the medically impoverished woman. So there's a chapter about that too, about his majority, how we can make that, how we can visualize the world. I think perhaps like what he looks like. But I get all the time, we just need more resources or Emily, we just need more money type. And I think that's short-sighted. I don't think that's true. I think we have... in the world enough resources and enough money that we need, we just don't have enough equity. And that's money, that's healthcare. We saw that in the pandemic with the lack of oxygen. There's a whole chapter in there on innovation. Yeah, and in India, yeah, when they were running out of oxygen, it's not because the world lacks oxygen. It's because the US and Zack Jackson (40:18.158) Hmm. Ian (40:25.054) Oh yeah, that was very heartbreaking. Oh yeah, that part, yeah, yeah. Emily Smith (40:40.584) stockpiles of it. And so the question innovation is making sure that oxygen is where it needs to be but also asking the harder systemic questions of why wasn't it there in the first place. That the other chapter in that section on courage is on valuing a life you know how do we value it which I think that one was the hardest one to write outside of the cost chapters. Do you remember those about Ebola? Ian (41:09.574) Yeah. Can we go into that a little bit? That, that was very challenging chapter to read too. You're right. Well, it just, and I'm in a butcher, their names, cause I'm getting to it, but I mean, do you mind telling us the story with that? The doctor who died, but then the other one who didn't. And yeah. Emily Smith (41:10.34) Yeah. Emily Smith (41:15.56) Yeah, go ahead. Emily Smith (41:23.488) Yeah. Emily Smith (41:27.524) Mm-hmm. Yes. So the it starts out introducing you to Dr. Khan. And for those of us in public health and global health, we know who Dr. Khan is. He is the Anthony Fauci of Africa. He had also been prior to the 2016 Ebola outbreak that hit his country and you know, West Africa. We all probably remember that epidemic. He had been working with congressmen here in the US, people, legends like Dr. Paul Farmer, who the book is in part dedicated to, to advocate for pandemic or epidemic preparedness for his hospital or resources for something that, could really cripple their system with not a whole lot of fanfare, not much was done with that type of legislation. So I'm trying to set the stage that he is a, very well known and respected doctor. When Ebola hit in his country, he was also frontline, because he's an MD. So he ended up getting Ebola. And this was in his health system that wasn't given the necessary resources to be ready for this epidemic, even though he was advocating for it. So with Ebola without the support of care, you deteriorate very quickly. Ebola is not highly It's highly fatal without the support, but not here in the US, which is why a lot of people or the people that have gotten it and have received care here have not passed away. So he gets it, he gets very sick, he gets transferred to a MSF unit that was specifically made for Ebola, and he keeps deteriorating. So they were having to make a decision on, do we give him what's called ZMAP? Zack Jackson (42:53.355) Hmm. Emily Smith (43:18.428) And at that point, it was an experimental drug for Ebola. It was the only option available for treatment outside of supportive care like IVs and rehydration. I go into a little bit of detail in the book, but I would definitely encourage people to go read that full story by the New York Times article, and that's in the references. But they made a decision not to give him ZMAP. Now, There were only a few vials of that in the world, one of which was actually at that MSF facility or very close by. He was also asked to be medevaced and that was given, a plane did come, but he was so sick, they refused to take him, cause it was not equipped like we see those, you know, the big ones here. So. He ends up dying just a few days later. Without his family, they finally let a friend go in at the end to be with him. If you reverse time a couple of days, there were two other doctors in West Africa, well, one doctor then a nurse that got Ebola too. Same thing, got very sick, deteriorated, had to make a decision of what to do. They were also asked to be medevaced and there was a conversation about ZMAP to be given to them. Both of them received ZMAP. And not only that, they were medevaced in the state of the art, you know, it looks like a sci-fi book airplane, just equipped with every legit thing possible to keep that contained and landed in here in the US. I remember that. I don't know if y'all remember that on the news where full hazmat suits. Ian (45:01.95) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (45:03.778) Yeah. Emily Smith (45:06.844) there's a team of 15, 20 doctors, and they walked out of that hospital a couple days later recovering. I was very intentional in that chapter who I named by name and who I didn't, because the point I was trying to make was if that was my family, I would move heaven and earth to get them medevaced. So I didn't want to dishonor that. Ian (45:14.207) Yeah. Zack Jackson (45:14.608) Hmm. Emily Smith (45:34.46) The question is more at a 30,000 foot level of who is worthy to get ZMAP? Who is worthy to get oxygen? Who is worthy to get medical resources or free healthcare or free education? How do we value a life and how are people's lives valued? Then when you take that to a country level, who gets what from a country? So as a person of faith, I wanted to write a chapter that honored Dr. Khan, but then the bigger questions too of how should we value people if we are believers of, you know, of the Bible or of what Jesus says. So it was a hard chapter to write. I also wanted to, that mission organization of the two people that got medevacked out were part of Samaritan's Purse, and I had been a vocal. I spoke against Franklin Graham's aspect, how he was treating the pandemic very vocally. So everybody knows what I think about that. I also have really good friends that work at Samaritan's Purse. So it's not about the missions agency. It's about some people having friends in very high places with a whole lot of money to help people in need while others don't and asking the question of why. Ian (46:41.255) Mm-hmm. Ian (46:56.823) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (46:59.906) Hmm. Ian (47:00.07) And I love how you bring it back to equity. Cause that, as you said, that's what this is all about. And which again is very tragic, right? But, um, I wanted to shift if I can, there was another thing I just wanted to, there was a quote that I loved is at the end of the chapter on, um, let's see, which one was this broadening our definition of health. When you're talking about the good Samaritan, I just wanted to read it out. Cause I, I just loved it. I read it to my wife. Emily Smith (47:08.468) Right. Emily Smith (47:23.849) Yeah. Zack Jackson (47:24.184) Hmm. Ian (47:30.522) And I just was really happy with this one. But you say blast paragraph, by the way, did the Samaritan tell the man the gospel or preach to him or hand out a tract? The parable doesn't tell us anything like that. I have a hunch Jesus would have mentioned it if it were important to the point he was making at the time, but he didn't. What he modeled for us with, with this story as being a neighbor and word indeed. And I actually was on a zoom meeting with, uh, my priest. It was last Wednesday. So, you know, nine days ago and other lay leaders in our church. And I just was telling them that we were interviewing you and then read that to them because I really part of my struggle is when people the certainty aspect of things that they this is the way we're supposed to behave. Or, you know, it's my way or the highway when it comes to being a person of faith. And I just love that you pointed that out of just there. That's not in there. And you were right. Right. When I read it, I just was like, oh, my gosh, that's yeah. Emily Smith (48:16.905) Yeah. Zack Jackson (48:22.902) Hmm. Ian (48:28.554) Like that's a great lens to take to it. To show that was not the purpose. And I loved that. And I just, oh, absolutely. Yeah. Emily Smith (48:28.821) Yeah. Emily Smith (48:34.272) Right. Well, don't you think he would have put it in there? I mean, Jesus is super duper smart. Yeah, I mean, he's he was very sneaky and intentional with the parables and how he told the stories. So I think he would have let us know that we needed to put a track in there before we gave people health care. But gosh, I mean, unconditional love is not conditional on viewing people as projects or Ian (48:47.68) Yeah. Emily Smith (49:01.196) proselytizing. So I just wanted, especially in the evangelical church, to, you know, we do things with, or we should do things just out of a goodness of heart. Because we're, I mean, it says in the Bible too, when we do these, you do it unto me. When you take care of the poor and feed and clothe, then you take, you do it for him. And so I keep in, I think keeping that perspective, I think we should do more of it in the evangelical church for sure. Zack Jackson (49:31.903) You mentioned the evangelical church. You have a chapter in here called Topics Too Many Evangelicals Don't Want to Talk About. I would expand that to topics that Christians in general don't talk enough about. What sorts of things should we be talking about in our faith communities? Emily Smith (49:38.932) Sure. Emily Smith (49:43.315) Yes. Emily Smith (49:50.2) Yes, I wrote that because when I got back from that UN meeting that I was, I told you about earlier, you know, I'm a pastor's wife and so we get in there for Sunday school and somebody called me a socialist and I did not know, I didn't know how to respond because it caught me so much off guard that wait a minute, I just told you we were talking about like poverty, you know, we can all agree that that's a problem and let's help. So I, it Ian (50:03.441) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (50:04.074) Hahaha Emily Smith (50:17.564) it made me realize we need a conversation about what some of these topics are. It also came out of the pandemic, you know, when I would talk about structural violence or systemic racism or Black Lives Matter, climate change, there was such this hubbub of we don't want to talk about it or overtones of we just don't go there. But I think when we hold those to the sky, they reflect heaven So I wanted to make, the whole first part of the book is on that, how to talk about that in non-threatening but challenging ways still. Then that last chapter on making the connections between climate change and poverty and the margins to try to at least let pastors know, talk about it from the pulpit. And here are some ways that you can talk about it where you don't have to scream. You know, you don't have to come across as a crazy liberal if you're in a predominantly Republican Texas type church. But they are holy words because they are equity words. So that's what that chapter is about. Thank you for bringing that up. I chuckled at the title. Ian (51:33.75) Yeah. Zack Jackson (51:34.598) It made me chuckle too as an evangelical who's been, well, former evangelical who's been accused of all kinds of things that, you know, is Jesus taught me, you know. I have a shirt that says, um, cast down the mighty, lift up the oppressed, uh, feed the hungry, send the rich away empty handed. And I often get accused of like Marxism for that. And I say, Emily Smith (51:44.86) Yeah. Right. Ian (51:45.438) Yeah. So then how good. Emily Smith (52:01.236) Oh sure, yeah. Zack Jackson (52:02.294) That's the Magnificat. Mary says that. Hahaha. Emily Smith (52:06.953) Right. Or Jesus' first sermon, you know, when he rolls out the scroll from Isaiah, that is full of captives free and the oppressed and yeah. Yeah. Zack Jackson (52:11.465) Mmm. Zack Jackson (52:16.35) Yeah, good news to the poor. Yeah. Ian (52:18.43) Yeah. So kind of adding to that chapter in particular, you know, the pandemic, you know, there was already lots of divisions in our society, obviously pandemic, I believe made it much worse and more in our face. And so I'm curious, you know, especially as someone who does work with, uh, trying to figure out ways to combat misinformation, science misinformation in particular. Um, Emily Smith (52:33.546) Yeah. Ian (52:46.878) with either from my education lens or just research or work I do. You know, I started when you started seeing the, uh, the increased hesitancy around the vaccine, um, that really started raising a lot of flags for me of like, this is not ending that we're going to see this. This is going to, you know, spread to hesitancies and laws against other vaccines that have made it so that diseases that have been eradicated from our country. solely because of those vaccines, those will come back. Um, and so I'm just curious, you know, the white evangelical community has a lot of power. And so how can one start to have conversations with those communities? You know, I've never been a member, so I know it'd be hard for me, but you were a member and you went through a lot because of what you were trying to do. How, how do we get back in to be able to figure out ways to work with those communities to build that trust again? Emily Smith (53:45.577) Yeah. Ian (53:45.598) Right. And to help them realize that the science is not there to get them. It's not evil. It's trying to save lives. I mean, that's the point. And so how would you recommend we do that? Emily Smith (53:55.209) Yeah. Emily Smith (53:59.884) I wonder if I would recommend something different if I answered this question in five years because I still feel like it's too close. But I think one of the biggest things is knowing who is actually going to have a conversation with you and who is not and having the wisdom to just leave the room or leave a church. Like it's okay. We don't leave a church because we don't like the color of the carpet. You know, I'm not that type of Christian. But Zack Jackson (54:16.215) Hmm. Emily Smith (54:29.668) If there are real equity things and faith issues, I think it is okay to leave a church. So if, I don't know, leave friends, lose friends. I know that's hard when there are kids and youth and some people have to stick with it. If you do stay and you're trying to have these conversations, I would be really careful to guard your heart on what you let in and... what you hear because it can pummel you, which is why I wanted to write some of that cost section so vulnerably. I wish I would have known a little bit more, maybe it wouldn't have been so bad if I would have had some of the wisdom to not go to every fight that I was invited to. So, and there's a chapter on that, on the wisdom of Nehemiah having that type. Yeah, thank you. I would also... Ian (55:18.172) Mm-hmm. Ian (55:21.566) Yeah, I liked that chapter a lot. That's very good. Emily Smith (55:27.56) tell people to be very cognizant, to pay attention to people who are not learning or listening anymore. Because the evangelical church has an incredible amount of power, always have. You know, like faith and prayer at football games where I grew up was still going on in the 90s and 2000s. It's probably still going on. Ten Commandments. And so we think that should be the norm or the centered of everything else when it actually shouldn't. And if somebody can understand why I just said that and why it matters, that's a person who listens. If others just dig in their heels more and we want the good old days, but don't realize those good old days were awful for a wide group of like Black Americans, any immigrants, then we've missed the point. So I think I'm, I don't think I'm answering your question. I think I'm telling people to be careful. Yeah, and also just to, there's this whole notion in the evangelical space that we just need to come together and get along. And that phrase really bothers me because that inherently denotes that there are two sides that need to come together, that both are weighted equally. And in that case, sure, let's come together because that's the center, but. Ian (56:23.878) No, you are. Yeah. Zack Jackson (56:26.402) Yeah. Emily Smith (56:48.84) When you have two sides and one is their voices have had the microphone longer than another side, it's time to equal out that balance where both sides can be heard. And that is still just certainly not going on, especially with science. Zack Jackson (57:00.034) Yeah. Zack Jackson (57:04.766) Right. So it's less about finding the middle point between two things and more thinking about it like a binary star system where the one that is the center of gravity has to do with the relative mass of each one. And so a big star and a small star, the center of gravity is going to be closer to the big star because that's where the mass is. And when we're talking about Emily Smith (57:27.37) Yeah. Zack Jackson (57:31.866) On this side, we have a climatologist, and on this side, we have your uncle on Facebook. Then, the center of gravity is not going to be in the middle of those two things, right? Emily Smith (57:38.636) Sure. Ian (57:41.931) Right. Emily Smith (57:42.948) Yes, or even in, I'm working with some indigenous communities in Brazil and listening a lot longer as a researcher of what their health needs are, including how to overcome them. So talking with traditional healers and valuing and honoring where people's stories are and their needs more than maybe a preconceived idea of what I think it should be. Zack Jackson (58:00.75) Hmm. Ian (58:13.098) Well, we are. Yeah. Well, so I just had a couple of smaller questions if that's all right. Um, and I just appreciate your time really do. But, so I'm curious, especially for you with your expertise, you know, as we reflect back on COVID-19 and this pandemic, um, it's natural for us to think about what we could have done differently. And I'm curious what your thoughts on that, but also too, what can we learn from this to better prepare? Zack Jackson (58:13.266) We're nearing the end. So if you want to. Emily Smith (58:19.584) Good. Ian (58:43.542) for future outbreaks of infectious diseases. Cause I might say another pandemic's gonna happen right away, but there will be outbreaks of infectious diseases. We know that. And so I'm just curious, what are the things that we can learn from this to try to do more preventative measures in the future? Like what would you recommend? Emily Smith (59:03.083) Yeah. recommend starting a conversation on trust in people's expertise instead of feeling like you're the expert on everything, which is a classic American thought. You know, we're very individualistic and so I think that could start, that's very 30,000 foot, but trust the experts. But then finding the community champions within the communities that are speaking from a place of their own. You know, I think that's why part of why I went viral is because I was speaking into my own community. I knew the language. I loved the church. I understood what pastors and their families were going through. So if you can find those and that means, you know, if we have distrust in some sort of science or the vaccines, then find the communities where that distrust is and then find the people there that are the champions. I just think it's a trust, it's a value issue. I know people don't like to hear about the political stuff, but who we vote for matters in very real ways on the ground, and we saw that. So I think having conversations about that too, you know, we are not voters of just one issue. If you are, that is going to trickle to a billion other types of issues. Letting people, especially like my children, I've got a teenager telling her about the importance of who you vote for and why that matters. Ian (01:00:43.958) So is there anything that you want to share? Anything else we should have asked but didn't? Emily Smith (01:00:51.684) No, I mean, I hope if anything for the book, I hope that it makes people laugh. Because there's a lot of stories in there that hopefully are funny. There's really silly pictures from my science fair board. Please go look at that. It's fantastic and a little over the top. But I also hope it... Yes. Zack Jackson (01:01:03.844) I'm going to go. Ian (01:01:06.464) Yes. Ian (01:01:12.402) I think the picture, if I can say the picture that you're staring at, I forgot who you're staring at, but you talk about that you have it. Uh, oh yeah. That picture of the board is great, but then the picture of you staring at somebody and you put, you have that framed on your desk. I, who was that again? I, I couldn't find that again in the book right now. Emily Smith (01:01:21.33) Yes. It's. Emily Smith (01:01:27.222) It's, yes, it's Dr. Tedros. He's the WHO president and I ran into him at the UN and that is my picture of me, like total fan girl moment with him. Yeah. Zack Jackson (01:01:38.382) Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe Ian (01:01:39.851) It was hilarious. And I just, I mean, I'm sure we've all done it. I do that with people all the time, but yours was captured on camera. And I love that you framed it and have put it on your own desk because I just find that hilarious. Like that's just such a wonderful story. Emily Smith (01:01:51.228) Yeah, I have- Emily Smith (01:01:55.372) Well, I have one that's a real one. I mean, they took one where we're both looking at the camera, legit, but I just keep it, because it was how I felt at the time. And... Oh, I'd like to show the card. Oh, thank you. Ian (01:02:05.662) When I love that you shared it with us, like I just, you know, I could totally envision it. And then all of a sudden I see the picture. I'm like, yeah, that's, that's what I was thinking. Like it just, that was really cool. Yeah. Zack Jackson (01:02:07.53) Yeah. Emily Smith (01:02:13.549) Yeah, this is a fangirl. Yeah. So. Zack Jackson (01:02:15.55) Yeah. And a completely honest review for those who are listeners and who hopefully trust the things that we say and do is that this book is really heartfelt. It is fact filled and it is driven by story and your own personal experience instead of just, you know, here's a list of objective facts. And for me, that not only conveys truth. in a way that is easier to digest, but also shows how authentic you are and how important this book is, how much of your own soul is encapsulated in this and how much of your own experience and growth from a young and idealistic nerd who's going to save the world, who gets jaded and cynical, but then finds hope and emerges on the other side stronger and I think all of our listeners should find a copy at your local bookstore or if you have to on Amazon. Or listen to the audiobook which is recorded by you and that must have been a fun experience. Emily Smith (01:03:25.176) Yes, it was fun. It's very hard to do too to just read it harder than expected, but it was fun to do. Ian (01:03:29.703) I'm back. Well, and if I can just add to that, I think that's a great, um, thumbs up there, Zach and recommendation for this book. I can't recommend it enough for people. I think it's an outstanding book. Um, I agree with everything Zach said, but I loved, I just absolutely loved that you couched it in the good Samaritan story. And also in Jesus, the second commandment to us about love, I neighbor a
Episode 119 Today, we are joined by paleontologist, Dr. Mary Schweitzer. She is professor in the department of biological sciences at North Carolina State University. She is also a research curator for paleontology at the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences. Her research interests include molecular paleontology, specifically the preservation and detection of original molecular fragments in well preserved fossil specimens. In 2005 she and her team shook the paleontology community when they reported finding soft tissue preserved in a 68-million-year-old T-Rex femur. Since that initial find, her team has unearthed mounting evidence that soft tissues, such as blood vessels, collagen and other proteins, can survive more than 66 million years of degradation. Fun fact, on one of her fossil hunts she spent three days in the field walking around on a broken leg because she didn't want to miss out on anything. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 118 In part 20 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with the Rev Dr Vikki Gaskin-Butler. She is a licensed psychologist (clinical and health psychology) and ordained clergy person. She received her bachelor's degree in psychology from Spelman College and her Master of Science and Ph.D. in psychology from the University of Florida. She also received a Master of Divinity degree from the Candler School of Theology at Emory University. She guest has served as a psychologist in university counseling centers, clinic director in an interfaith-based counseling center, and as director of a university psychology clinic. She has supervised numerous students in pursuit of psychology, mental health counseling, and social work degrees. She has led clergy consultation groups and served as a consultant with church/church-affiliated and secular organizations. In addition, she has served as a minister of education and an associate pastor in local churches. She draws on her knowledge of human potential from her experience as a psychologist and ordained clergy person to support the psychological, spiritual, and physical well-being of all people. Through her first-hand knowledge of life as a wife, mother, musician, professor, clinician, and minister, she has the insight to support the needs of adults, including performing artists, clergy, and health professionals. In her words: "My passion is to constantly move toward my own divine potential. Throughout this journey, I have experienced struggle, doubt, grief, joy, peace, and all of the emotions that make us human. These emotions and the experiences connected with them have made me more whole as I followed the thread of healing to freedom. These emotional experiences have also created within me a deep well of compassion for others as they journey on their paths to health and wholeness." You can listen to her last Down the Wormhole episode here... https://www.downthewormhole.com/e/womanist-psychology-of-religion-with-rev-dr-vikki-gaskin-butler/ Also be sure to check out her podcast and all her other work here... https://www.drvikki.org/ Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 117 Today, we are joined by the one and only Rev. Dr. Pamela Conrad. is the rector of St. Alban's Episcopal Church in Glen Burnie, Maryland. She's also an astrobiologist and planetary scientist specializing in understanding how planets do or do not evolve into habitable environments, and she is presently involved in the exploration of Mars with the Perseverance Rover and its companion, the Ingenuity helicopter. She has explored extreme environments all over the Earth including in the high arctic, Antarctica, Death Valley, and the deep sea hydrothermal vents of the Pacific sea floor, to name a few. We talk about life on other planets, cherishing life on this planet, the future of the church, the lessons we can learn from entropy, and so much more. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 116 In part 19 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Emily Gerdin. She was raised in two faiths growing up (Judaism & Protestantism), and her interfaith upbringing inspired her to study how minds are shaped by religious worldviews. She is a PhD candidate in developmental psychology at Yale University, studying how children conceive of religious groups as sometimes similar to other social categories in the world (e.g., race, gender, nationality) and sometimes very, very different. Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 115 In part 18 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr Stephen Burgin. He is an associate professor of secondary science education at the University of Arkansas. His research interests focus on the authentic practices employed by professional scientists and how school science can more closely approximate that work. As an evangelical Christian preparing preservice secondary science teachers in the southern United States, Dr. Burgin is uniquely positioned to help his students and those he comes into contact with grapple with their relationship to both science and faith. Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 114 In part 17 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Tyler J Fuller. Tyler is a Ph.D. student in the Graduate Program in Religion at Boston University. He is a sociologist of religion and a health educator. His research interests focus on the social scientific study of religion, health-seeking behaviors, and faith-based health education and promotion. Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 113 Today, we are joined by astronomer, author, speaker, and Director of the Vatican Observatory, Guy Consolmagno! We talk about asteroid mining, the ethics of renewable energy, alien spirituality, and why the Vatican has an observatory in southern Arizona. https://www.vaticanobservatory.org/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 112 In part 16 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr. Richard Middleton. Dr. Middleton is Professor of Biblical Worldview and Exegesis at Northeastern Seminary in Rochester, NY. He is past president of the Canadian Society of Biblical Studies (2019–2021) and the Canadian-American Theological Association (2011–2014). His most recent book is Abraham's Silence: The Binding of Isaac, the Suffering of Job, and How to Talk Back to God (Baker Academic, 2021). We talk about the freedom and wisdom that comes from letting the Bible be what the Bible is. What is the point of Job? Does God really need all that praise? How does paleoanthropology inform our reading of scripture? https://jrichardmiddleton.com/ Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 111 We're back! After an unannounced and unexpected hiatus, we are back with new episodes, interviews, and surprises. Today, we sit down with neurotheologian, research scientist, and best-selling author Dr. Andrew Newberg. We talk about the neurological mechanics of spiritual experiences, the origin of religion, psychedelics, mysticism, and the "infinite regressive doubt" that brings him spiritual peace. Don't miss this one! Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 110 Let's all geek out about the James Webb Space telescope!!! If you haven't seen the first five pictures that NASA released from Webb, make sure you check them out here... https://www.nasa.gov/webbfirstimages Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 109 Do prayers for healing work? Do "thoughts and prayers" actually have a measurable effect on a sick person? What should we be praying for anyway, and are we missing unique opportunities for spiritual growth? Rachael is our guide this week as we navigate scientific studies, Jewish prayers, and the difference between being "healed" and "cured". Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 108 In part 15 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr. Joseph Shane. He teaches us how to navigate contentious spaces, how to communicate across the pews, and how to have a more gentle existential crisis. My favorite line from this episode is, "Evolve your faith or hasten its irrelevance". You're going to need to listen to the whole episode to get the context of that, though! Dr. Joseph Shane is Professor of Chemistry and Science Education at Shippensburg University. In addition to his responsibilities to chemistry and teacher education, he teaches an honors seminar on interactions between science and religion and conducts outreach to regional churches and public venues. He was the lead editor and contributor to a book to assist science teachers in addressing topics with religious implications, Making Sense of Science and Religion: Strategies for the Classroom and Beyond, which was published through the National Science Teaching Association (NSTA) in 2019. He is also an Elder and youth Sunday school teacher at First Presbyterian Church (PCUSA) in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 107 Do you remember that brief "anthropause" in 2020 when billions of people stayed inside due to COVID? Do you remember seeing dolphins in Venice and wolves wandering the streets of NYC? Most of those stories were fake, but they were so believable because that's how nature works. It heals, it rebounds, and it finds a way. So in this episode, we want to take a look at what makes nature so resilient, what we can learn from it, and what our place is within it. We're talking asteroids, cosmic flowers, and divine intervention. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 106 We are thrilled to be joined today by author, speaker, and public theologian, Brian McLaren. His new book, "Do I Stay Christian?: A Guide for the Doubters, the Disappointed, and the Disillusioned" is an absolute must-read for any Christian struggling to make sense of things in this crazy world we live in. We talk about creating hope, fighting white supremacy, re-wilding Christianity, and the playful joy of reimagining religion. Speaking of reimagining religion, have you checked out Zack's new podcast with his wife Nichole, "Reimagining Faith with the Pastors Jackson"? If you enjoy DtW (and of course you do), then you should check it out! Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:04 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. Our guest today is an author, speaker, activist and public theologian. He is the author of over 15 books including faith after doubt, a generous orthodoxy and a new kind of Christian which got me in a whole lot of trouble at my home church 20 years ago, his new book do I stay Christian, a guide for the doubters, the disappointed and the disillusioned is an absolute must read for any Christian struggling to make sense of things in this crazy world we live in is an absolute joy and honor to welcome to the podcast, Brian McLaren. Oh, joy Brian McLaren 00:45 and honor for me to be with you guys. So, so glad to be here. Zack Jackson 00:49 Yes, I was thrilled to death to get that the email confirming that you had time in your very busy schedule to be with us today. We're all big fans, and I'm sure a lot of folks on the of our listenership likewise. Brian McLaren 01:03 Well, hey, and I gotta say, now that I know about you guys, I'm your fan as well. And, you know, this subject of the inner interaction between faith and science, my goodness, so important these days. So really happy to be in this conference. Yes, thank you. Zack Jackson 01:21 I love the way that you weave these two things together in your writings, by the way, and I've noticed it really in the past 10 years worth of books are so it seems, it seems almost effortless that every once in a while you're just gonna get some reference in there to evolution, some reference in there to the cosmic origins of the universe, it just seems like it is. It is always somewhere in the back of your mind. Brian McLaren 01:45 Well, it's Yeah. And maybe I could say it this way. Without science. I don't think I could be a Christian. So. So yeah, I can't imagine how anyone would want to have a faith that were they had to keep their faith in one compartment. And then everything else. Another compartment compartments, right. Yeah. Zack Jackson 02:10 Well, that's a sound clip that I'll definitely Absolutely. So Ian and I have been talking a lot recently about your new book, which when the time this podcast launches will have been released yesterday, so available to all of your major retailers. So this book, which is just so helpfully entitled, do I stay Christian? answers that question, which I think a lot of folks have had over the past couple of years, especially. But it's it's very helpfully organized into three sections, the answer that question that? No, I will not stay Christian. And here's why. Yes, I will stick it out and stay Christian. And the last section is how, which of those sections is taking up the most real estate in your mind? And in your day to day life? Brian McLaren 03:03 Well, let's see. I think all of them jostle for the top position. But I think actually, the writing of this book propelled the third question up in importance. Because in the writing of this book, I realized it's just inevitable. Some people cannot stay Christian, the religion is killing them. It's damaging them, they need to get away at least for a time. And, and other people will stay Christian, it's who they are, and how could they deny who they are? And, and then what I realized is, even whatever you decide on staying Christian, you have to wake up the next morning, and ask what kind of a human being am I going to be? And that I hope that the Reading of the book helps lift the importance of that question up for everybody. Ian Binns 04:02 Well, and I, you know, Brian, I really appreciated that aspect of the book. And as I said, Before recording, I absolutely loved the book, you know, so for me, I don't have the kind of historical experiences that I know, Brian, you talk about in your books, and that Zach has had and talked about before, the feeling I needed to leave, like, deconstruct and then come back or anything like that. But one of the things that I've always struggled with, is and you you do so well, in the first several chapters, when the answer to your question is no, you know, those chapters explaining No, just really stood out for me. And so but sorry, I know, I'm rambling. This is normal for me. But at the end, I loved as you just said, to connect it back to what kind of human do we want to be? You know, I tell people a lot when they question, my faith, because I'm open with my doubts and questions and the idea of a literal resurrection. I think those are all questions and doubts I have. And I don't know if I'll ever be able to resolve them yet. But I think I prefer to think of it as that I want to live my life, fighting for what Jesus fought for, Brian McLaren 05:12 what a great way to what a great way to sit. Ian Binns 05:15 Right? And so if it's more of that's the way I live, I don't have to stand on a rooftop and scream, everyone be a Christian. It's more of a this is the life I want to live. And I love that you did that. Brian McLaren 05:26 And isn't it ironic that major sectors of the Christian religion are really uninterested, whether you want to fight for the things Jesus fought for, they're really interested in whether you will check certain boxes, agreeing with their authority figures about what you're supposed to say about Jesus. So I just can't help but think that Jesus would be happier with someone who's ready to join him in the struggle with his word for that was follow me, then then have certain opinions about me. In fact, you know, there's that password thing in the Gospels where he says, You know, I really don't care if you call Me Lord, Lord, I mean, what difference does that make the words you use about me? If you don't do what I say so? Ian Binns 06:10 All right. Well, and in this book, and also to in your podcast, learning how to see, you start off talking about something that was very close to me. So I got my PhD from the University of Virginia. And so I was in my wife and I were in Charlottesville was the first place we really lived as a young married couple. Were there for 208. And so when the the situation happened in Charlottesville in August of 2017, that was very challenging for us, because the grounds of UVA are places I spent four years of my life that we love that town. And so that was very challenging for us. And then hearing you on your podcast and Reading this book. I would love to, if you could talk more about that experience. Because I didn't realize you were there. And so I just curious if you can kind of talk about that. Yeah. Brian McLaren 07:04 Well, the story of how I ended up there was kind of interesting, I had introduced this couple to each other who ended up getting married, and both were seminary graduates. And so they were a ministry couple in Charlottesville, and they contacted me and they said, Look, Brian, we you may not have even heard about this. And I hadn't it it turns out, you know, before, was it August 10. I forgotten the date now. Whatever the date was, in August, they'd had a series of Ku Klux Klan rallies, it was like it. A lot of people don't know this. But there is a group of people who are planning for a civil war. And they want to make Charlottesville the capital of the new Confederacy. Ian Binns 07:46 I did not know that part. Brian McLaren 07:48 Yeah, it's scary. And it's crazy stuff. But and, and yet very disturbing. And they said, so a really big one is coming in August. And we're we're trying to get clergy to come support us, and to stand with us. And they said, we're finding a lot of clergy of color. And we're finding a lot of women, clergy who will come we're really finding it hard to get white male clergy to come. And of course, there's a big supply of them, but they just couldn't get them to come. So they said it. They said, Is there any chance you could come you need to know it's going to be dangerous, there going to be a lot of guns there. Several militia have already signed up to be there. And they'll all come heavily armed. And I said, I'm not going to tell that last part to my wife. But yes, I would be honored to be there. Actually, she knew that there would be some danger. And she made me make certain promises to her about what I would do and not to when I was there, but it was just an experience I'll never forget first seeing how organized these folks were. They were super, super highly organized. I was invited into a meeting an Antifa meeting of people who were organizing to try to not let these folks sort of rule the city for a day. And I never thought in my lifetime, I would see people carrying Confederate flags, and Nazi flags and a bunch of other flags along with Bibles and other Christian paraphernalia. I never thought I would see that. And of course, and I happen to be just up the street when Heather hair and other was killed and others were injured by a guy using a car as a terrorist weapon to drive through a crowd. And a group of us clergy went I was wearing you know, black leather shoes and I just remember the feeling of my feet slapping against the ground as I ran down this hill into this crowd where there's chaos and people screaming and crying. And so an experience I'll never forget. But then January 6 2021 happened and I just thought there they are again, you know, and in between, I'd organized an a public An event here in Florida where I live, where we had been, our event was disrupted in the entrances were blocked by the proud boys. So I yeah, this has been a big part of my experience and watching the complicity of major sectors of the Christian faith with these folks has been the AI, it's highly significant in the way I wrote this book, do I stay Christian? Because I feel like that I wish I'd put the sentence in the book. But it only became clear to me actually, in the last few days, that one of the reasons I wrote the book the way I did, and I took those first 10 chapters to really take the No seriously is because I am worried that those 10 chapters give a kind of overview of some of Christianity's crimes. And through the centuries, I'm worried that the worst things Christianity has ever done will be exceeded in the next few years. And that's why I feel anyone who stays Christian, better be aware of the danger that our religion poses to this world and to many of our neighbors. And that then puts a kind of responsibility on us to say, if I'm going to inhabit this religion, I better take responsibility for trying to stand up to some of the harm that it is in danger of doing and not just in danger of doing it is actually doing, you know, as we speak, no, yeah. Zack Jackson 11:29 I mean, we're not just complicit in the rise and spread of white supremacy. Western Christianity is the author of white supremacy, it is very much our child. And it is completely inseparably intertwined with Western Christianity as we know it. And so this is not an issue for the black church to figure out or to lead us in. This is not an issue for people of color to be taking charge. This is our problem, our sin and our need to, to work on to fix to fight. And you're somebody who's been at the frontlines of that. It seems, what what can the rest of us do us white Christians out here? How can we help fight the scourge? I mean, just look, even as we're recording this, we just, we just witnessed another white supremacist, killed 10 people in a buffalo grocery store. And by the time that this podcast launches, who knows? We'll have there will be another one. It just seems like we're just spinning our wheels. Yes. Brian McLaren 12:31 Well, let me say first, I really agree with you that white Christians really have a responsibility right now. And one of our responsibilities is to listen to the cries and the agony and the frustration of our neighbors of color. who are who are just, you know, who can blame them for saying, you know, if they hear thoughts and prayers one more time, you know, I mean, it's just, it's just, yeah. So here's what one thing I think we can do, I think we can all make a commitment that we will never let a racially harmful statement go unchallenged. And, and I think we have to learn how to challenge them in ways that don't create a worst blowback. But silence is its own vote of confidence, and its own voters support for outrageous, immoral, harmful, dangerous statements. So my little recommendation to people is that you've developed your own version of this five word statement, here's my version of it. Wow, I see that differently. It's instead of, you know, you're such a bigot, you're, it's I see that differently. I throw a while in there, because I want to add a little bit of emotional intense intensity without having to yell or scream. Wow, I see that differently. And almost every time I say that, people say, What do you mean? What do you mean? And if it's in public, I say I say to them, I'd rather talk to you about this in private. If you'd like to ask me about it in private some other time, I'll be glad to talk to you. And the reason I say that, and there might be times to have the conversation in public. But what I've noticed is that anytime these conversations happen in public egos are so involved, people are defending themselves, people are performing their loyalty to whatever group it is. And so it seldom becomes an act of communication, and usually becomes the kind of argument that hardens people and their positions. And I would like to be someone who helps little cracks form in their position or, or helps soften their position. And if if I can set up the terms of that discussion, then I'll say to them, if you're ever curious about why I see things differently and how like came to see things differently. I'll be glad to have that conversation with you and private. Just let me know when you'd like to know how I came to see things differently, because I'm not asking them to tell me how they see things. I'll listen respectfully if they want. But I've been listening respectfully, that's what got us into this situation. And so while I see that differently is my, my mantra in these circumstances? Ian Binns 15:27 Well, that's very disarming, I Brian McLaren 15:29 think, and I go, and I feel it's honest, and it's not aggressive. But it also is an act of protest. And it's just an act of deferring boldly, hopefully, graciously, non hatefully, you know? Yeah. And frankly, I'll just say, frankly, late in the book there, in that house section of the book, there's a chapter called, announce and renounce, or renounce and announce, and in some ways, it's the same thing. It's, it's, it's having more and more of us just have the courage to say, I am not where you are. And to do it in a way that says, It's not that I hate you. It's not that I am going to insult you. In fact, I'm going to just state in a way that says, I don't, I'm nothing's changing in our relationship, but I'm not where you are. If that creates a problem for you, then we'll deal with it. But I need to let you know I can be at a different place than you are. So I thought Ian Binns 16:31 that story you told in that chapter about John Ray and Amanda was really powerful. And one of the phrases that stood out, it was after early on in the story. When John Ray comes back to Amanda and says, I was confronted by your father for 20 minutes. And the phrase that you use in the book was he felt that he was in the presence of Christian hate? Yes. And I thought that was just just those four words, or five words. Yeah, forward presence of Christian hate just really kind of caught me of because I feel like that's what we're seeing a lot of right now. Brian McLaren 17:08 Yes, yes. And of course, Christians will say, that's not hate, that's love. And they, and they're satisfied with that. But there is something really ugly going on. It's just ugly. And I've experienced that. And my gosh, when you're on Twitter, and Facebook, you know, I grew up fundamentalist. And part of being a fundamentalist is you didn't cuss? And you didn't use crude language. And you you felt this obligation to be decent and, and respectful. But my gosh, the profanity and I mean, it's just, it's just shocking to me to see what what people are doing in the name of Jesus, and it's all sort of acceptable. And of course, some of this is because they're imitating their new leader, you know, Donald Trump, who's, in a sense, the new leader of their denomination that has that has newly formed and, and, and part of this is just stuff that's been in the American psyche for a long time, and maybe we're better with a profanity, because it's, you know, somebody said, what I mentioned, I've had a lot of interactions with the proud boys, they said, there, it's just the kk k with that, and the sheets are off. And I think that's, there's some truth to that. So this is a historical reckoning, that needed to happen. So better now than not letting it happen, you know, letting it fester for another 100 years. Zack Jackson 18:35 Yeah, that chapter, which kind of tells the story of a couple whose ideologies had changed, their faith had changed, and they hadn't really let their family know, which I think a lot of folks who have deconstructed can relate to because they're going to, they're afraid of then being renounced by their family. And she gathers up the courage after her husband has been sort of accosted for 20 minutes to go up and just tell her father, this is how it's going to be from here on out. And you talked about that in terms of a coming out story for her. And that framing, I think is really helpful. And something that queer theologians, this gift that they have given us, this idea of coming out, it is a vulnerable experience, in which you can be hurt in all new ways. But it is such an empowering experience. I read one, one theologian referred to John one as God's coming out that Jesus is incarnation is him, showing who he truly is to the world and offering up himself to be either accepted in new ways or hurt in all new ways. And I honestly had never understood the Incarnation until then. But this idea that those of us us who are straight sis hetero folks who have never had the need to come out to people to tell them, This is how you have perceived me. But this is how I truly am. We've just always been known for who we are, that this is something that we we should learn, that we should need to love louder than the hate and that we need to be more vocal. It's not enough to just love on our own, but that we need to love loudly and outwardly. Yeah, Brian McLaren 20:30 another little saying that has kind of been sitting with me lately is I would rather be rejected for who I am then accepted for who I am not. Ian Binns 20:39 And I wrote that down. Well, like I, I want to tattoo that on my arm or something, because I think that's such a powerful phrase. It really is. Brian McLaren 20:47 And I think what one of the things that just saying it that way helps me do is realize that the fear of rejection has so much power over so many of us. And as someone who's experienced a bit of rejection. And now I know Zach has led to other people to being rejected. But, but it's, it's not the end of the world. It's not the worst thing that ever happens to you. In fact, some pretty amazing positive things happen can happen in the experience of rejection. So And isn't it interesting in the gospels, this is really a major theme of Jesus teaching. Hey, guys, if you take seriously what I'm saying, you're gonna be rejected, here's what's gonna happen and it and then we're surprised when it happens. Zack Jackson 21:39 Right? The high priest is gonna block you on Twitter at this point. And Ian Binns 21:44 well, and I think you mentioning the rejection, the fear of rejection, I mean, that's something that cripples me at times, you know, with my own work of wanting to write, as an academic for more public audience, it, it, something that holds me back quite a bit. And Reading, you know, your book has helped and then also Rob Bell's work as well as helping me remember that it's not, I cannot control people's reactions to my work in my message. Brian McLaren 22:14 And so we're writing about things that matter than then there are things that people have strong opinions about, and they have vested interests in. And so of course, there'll be pushback, like, you know, every once in awhile, I have to sit down with myself and just say, of course, people would get upset. What were you expecting to get a Nobel Prize? You know, of course. So, yeah, that's just the territory. And it's, it's, it's part of the privilege of talking about things that really matter and, and working on things then that matter. So I like that doesn't it doesn't make it easy, but it does, I think it is, it's something we have to do that helps us navigate through those first few experiences of rejection, that that can either scar us for life or become our hazing. For for a member membership, and a new, a new community. Zack Jackson 23:19 And I've experienced a lot of the dirty underbelly of the Christian church growing up in, in the back rooms of the church, and then being a part of church leadership, the first 10 chapters of your book, where you talk about all the reasons why you should leave Christianity. I, at the end of every chapter, I thought to myself, I know where he's going. I know there's a there's a part two, but I'm almost ready to just like, just close the book here and be like, yeah, no, he does have a point, why should I be a part of this and re even Reading part two, a couple chapters in where you're talking about why we should stay Christian. And I thought, these don't quite outweigh yet in my mind, where, where Part one was. And then then I hit chapter 14. And you asked us to consider an anticipatory Christianity that is leaning towards the future. And I love that phrase so much. I highlighted it, I wrote it down. And anticipatory Christianity because it describes the stance towards the future in which that doesn't necessarily claim that everything in the future is better than everything in the past that we're evolving into something better, just something different to newer and maybe better adapted. Would you care to unpack that phrase for us? Yeah. Wow. That is bringing you life and older. Brian McLaren 24:46 There's a lot of ways to do it. But a kind of fun way is to say that both in religion and science, a lot of us inherited a religion, where the Locus of Power was always in the past. So So the, you know, the big bang happens. And I bet most of us have seen this in a science movie somewhere. And it's like somebody's playing pool and they hit the cue ball and the cue ball hits the rack of, you know, balls, and everything is action reaction being driven from the past. And that describes, that's one way of looking at the universe. It's one way of describing the universe. But there's another way to look at it to say, to think of the Locus of Power, not just being in the past, but actually being the future itself, that opens, that constantly gives everything a chance to move in some new direction. And the way that theologians have talked about this is to say instead of thinking of God, pushing things out of the past into the future, imagine God in the distant future, inviting things to keep moving toward maturity. The one of the early church scholars, who is a very imaginative fellow, his name was Gregory of Nyssa. And Gregory, got in trouble with a lot of his fellow scholars, because they all bought into this idea of Greek philosophy that perfection is static, because perfection can only get worse, if it could change, it wouldn't be perfect. If it could change for the better, it wouldn't be perfect. So perfection is always static. And Gregory said, that's just not good enough. He said, perfection is infinite progression, this idea of an endlessly open future for endlessly new possibilities, you know, and so that way of thinking, instead of God's sort of being in control, either behind us or standing over us, it's God inviting us into greater freedom, and greater wholeness and greater maturity and greater relationship and greater diversity and greater beauty, which is actually what we see kind of unfolding in the universe, you know, there was no Mozart or Bob Dylan or Taylor Swift, you know, 4 billion years ago. And so these things, new things that you never ever would have anticipated, are baked into the possibilities and, and have chances to open up. So that's, and when we let that kind of almost scientific view, also have a theological expression. It helps us think about Christianity, not as something that is already set in concrete, but something that is, in its very early stages. Zack Jackson 27:48 It is hard to think about Christianity in its early stages, 2000 years later, but that is, that can be helpful, Ian Binns 27:56 if we can, you know, I think I said before we started recording that, especially Reading the first part of your book, where you're providing, you know, many reasons why the answer to your question will be no, that's when I was Reading it near my wife, and I would stop and be like, Oh, my God, I have to have to read this for you. So if I can read a quote to you, that just really stood out for me. And I just would love to get your thoughts on it a little bit more, but it's in the chapter. Because Christianity is a failed religion. And at the very end, you talk about, you know, you kind of are speaking to that your reader, obviously, of asking if that was harsh to them, for people to consider many of the things you've already shared. But you say if you persist in minimizing these failures of the past and brushing them aside as trivial matters, then please realize, to growing millions of people, you now represent the contemporary failure of Christianity to transform lives. To put it more bluntly, you are a living example of the failure of Christianity, and you are another reason for them not to stay Christian, which resonated with me. I mean, I probably I'm very emotional person. And I started crying when I read it, but it was just a, I'd love to know, how did that feel. As a leader in Christianity, many people look to you to write that sentence. Brian McLaren 29:21 Yeah, I remember writing it and I and I have been in so many of those conversations. I won't mention this name just out of politeness, but a leader of people in my generation, and probably your generation would know his name. He died a few years ago, but he was super well known, highly respected on Christian radio and all that sort of thing. And we once had an email exchange and he gave me permission to go public with it, but I just couldn't do it. And in that email exchange, he said the Crusades weren't that serious. The Witch burnings were exaggerated, he just minimized every single thing. And I just thought to myself, you know, you think you're making Christianity look better. And something else I realized about him is that, for him, Christianity and Western civilization were fused together. And his defense of Christianity was a defense of Western civilization. And in that way, it was an act of aggression toward Muslims, and Buddhists and Hindus. And so it all sort of was of a piece, you know, and I think that's part of what so many of us just don't want to be part of anymore, we don't want to be part of that kind of dismissive defensive. Christianity. And, and, of course, you know, I'm not wanting to go around and vilify all these people of the past. I mean, they are what they are, and they did what they did. And, and, and if I'd been alive, I may have done many of the similar, similar things. But to say that the message of Jesus Christ should not have demanded more of people. It just feels to me like a pretty low opinion of the of Jesus and His message. Ian Binns 31:21 Well, and as I said, early on to, you know, I try to live by his message and what he fought for, and died for, right. But one other thing you said a little bit earlier in the text, you said, you know, teaching others by their example, to live by Jesus's spiritual method of radical non discriminatory love and courageous truth telling, you know, that's gotten me in trouble at times. With some, and I don't do it nearly as much as I used to. And Zach has actually said, and some of my science education friends have said that they're really happy that I don't engage as much on Twitter, as I used to, partly because I was blocked by Ken Ham, who is still welcome to be on the show. But what I also have several friends who are members of the LGBTQ community, and who are people of faith, and I remember telling one of them one time when we were having a conversation about some of their struggles, and I just kind of said that I believe in a God who loves us for us. Yeah. And that if that makes me wrong, when I have to face God, it didn't my time. And I'm told that's not the way it works. My response to my friend was, I don't want to be there anyway. Like if that if that's what can get me into heaven. If Heaven is a place that they say, you messed up, you have to renounce that I'd say I'm going somewhere else. Brian McLaren 32:49 Yes, that that God is not good enough. Right? That's just not good enough. My friend Tripp fuller says, Look, if if your view of God isn't half as nice as Jesus, there's something wrong. So, right, Zack Jackson 33:06 how can Christians take Jesus and like, look at him in the Gospels? And then be like, All right, well, but at the end of it all, we're gonna meet scary God. And he's going to do the scary judge thing. While Jesus the guy, you know, the don't cast the first stone guy. He's just going to be in his room because he's a naughty boy or something. I don't know. Why is he not up on the jet like we can affirm that all members of the Trinity are of one substance, according to the ancient Creed's, but yet won't apply Jesus's examples of grace to the judgments that we fear from God, there Brian McLaren 33:46 was a Quaker theologian who I just think captured what we're discussing right now. So aptly, he said, it was Elton Trueblood. And this isn't a quote, but this is sort of the substance of one of his ideas. He said, The Christian understanding of the deity of Christ did not mean that we had a definition of God. And Jesus came along and we lifted him up to that definition. He said, what this really is supposed to mean is that we had a definition of God. And Jesus came along, and we had to adjust our definition of God. And I think that's very well, I think that's very well said, I think that's what it should have been. I don't know if that is what happened historically. But I think that's how it should have been. Zack Jackson 34:38 Yeah, if I can, if I can pivot here for a second. We've we've been on some heavy topics. I want to I want to lighten things up a little bit. I your chapter on rewilding ourselves and our faith and humanity itself was far and above my favorite chapter of the book. I highly They did. The basically the whole thing. It reminded me very much of a conversation those longtime listeners might remember, way back in 2020, episode 42 with Dr. Scott, the paleontologist from PBS, his dinosaur, I Ian Binns 35:15 remembered it too. First thing I thought about called Zack Jackson 35:19 reinventing the natural world was was his and his theory. And his, the whole devotion he has towards educating children is that in in order in order to save the world, from climate disaster from environmental disaster, we will not do that by better spreadsheets. Because nobody is apathetic because they don't know the facts. They're apathetic because they don't care. And so his entire life Miss mission is to help children fall back in love. I love to read and chant nature, and to get them outside. And even while watching television to then inspire them to go outside afterwards. Because when you fall in love with the world, then you want to save it. It's your mother. Again, it's not it's not just a commodity anymore. And Reading your chapter about being out on a kayak in the middle of the of Florida. And there's gators and birds and fish and the whole deal. I'm I'm there in my mind. And I'm imagining my own slice of wild here in the Pennsylvania mountains. And I'm wondering if you can talk a little bit about how the natural world and how this process of rewilding has awoken your spirituality and how we might best share that with people. Brian McLaren 36:40 Well, maybe I could just tell you two quick stories. One from yesterday, we had a death in the family over the last week. And so I was out of state. I was in New Jersey, for the funeral. And I had to do a whole bunch of interviews for this book. So I was in, in the home office of my deceased brother in law. To conduct these interviews, I brought along my microphone and had my computer set up. And right outside his window. There's a dogwood tree and in the dogwood tree, about two feet from the window was Robin building her nest and so I was doing interviews literally from you know, 10 in the morning till 11 At night, cuz some of them were Pacific Coast time. And so as I sat there through the day, I watched the mother Robin, come and go and come and go mouthful of mud a mouthful of grass and watching her use her the shape of her body to form the perfect cup. If you've ever observed a bird's nest, it's just this perfect semi sphere. Oh my goodness, it's just an I never gotten to watch that. That's such a intimate angle. And if that wasn't good enough, just before dark, she was out, I guess gathering more materials. And a little English Sparrow came in and climbs into her nest and steals a bunch of grass. And it was just great. And I just felt like I just got to see a little bit of mischief and fat, all the rest of it. But just all felt I just it just was it. There's a poet. What a great resume. There's a fellow named Lanham from Clemson University, who's a biologist and a poet. Isn't that a great combination? And he uses that term in one of his poems orgasm, that we have these experiences of oh, that produce this sort of delight you know, that's that goes beyond words. And, and I had said I felt watching that all unfold. And then another experience. Last summer I fall in love with a place I highly recommend it for people who like this sort of thing called ring Lake Ranch. It's a Christian based retreat center, but it's just a place that brings you out into the wilderness of Wyoming and you get to ride horses and fly fish and hike and and just enjoy an incredible a place with deep history for the sheep eat or people that Native American people that area and, and I took a hike with a botanist. And as we walked through a Badlands area along the Wind River Gorge. She would just everything she talked about was the relationship. We came along she said see that flower there says I've never seen that flower in bloom during the daytime. It's a night blooming flower. And she said there is one species of wasp that pollinates that flower and it only comes out at night. And she said isn't it amazing to think one species of Wasp and one flower have evolved to be sort of partners in their in one another survival, you know, and then we'd come upon a sagebrush, and she talked about before she was done, you just felt you were on holy ground, it was like a burning bush. But it was the sagebrush because she explained, this is high desert. And in the in the winter, snow drifts form around sage brushes, and that snow drifts, then when it melts, it concentrates moisture around the base of the sagebrush, which helps the sagebrush live but also becomes like a little oasis of moisture. And then she starts talking about all the creatures that depend on that moisture of the sagebrush. And I mean, you're done. And you're just, you're, it's ecstatic to think of the web of life that is around you. And, and that sense of connectedness, if that's not holy, I don't know what it is, you know. And so any kind of Christianity that wants to ignore all that and just look at the world as something that God plans to destroy, because he wants to suck our souls up into heaven or send them somewhere else. You just think what, what a blasphemy to, to discount and the wonder and glory that's there, you know, in that a Badlands of the Wind River Gorge. Zack Jackson 41:27 You talk about that sort of mutual evolution. And the two things that when we first were developing the ideas of evolution, the common conception was survival of the fittest, the strongest, right the the beefiest and biggest teeth. And we've learned that the in many ways that was just white supremacy, Reading itself into science, when the truth is that it's survival of the most adaptable, the most resourceful, the best collaborators is, is survival of those who can work with others best is is how species evolve and continue that relationality is just, Brian McLaren 42:10 and if we're going to survive, we have to learn that wisdom from from creation, I was honored to be invited to write a book about the Galapagos Islands. So I've had a chance to visit there a few times. And I in my book, I wrote a couple of chapters about Charles Darwin and I, I got to read his biography while I was there, and and then just did a bunch of research and that term survival of the fittest, you may know this. It wasn't Darwin's term. And Arthur, Arthur Wallace, I think it was Arthur was his first name, I, he, he recommended the term because natural selection sounded like it personified nature too much, you know that nature is making choices. Like a Calvinist, God makes choices, and they wanted to get away from that. When they use the word fittest, it meant fit best, the opposite of the most domineering and aggressive, it's those who fit best. Zack Jackson 43:06 So yes, yes, you will love my favorite. That my favorite new fact in physics that is just that is filling my soul with all in wonder these days. Is that do you think about the part of the atom that makes that has stuff, right? That has mass that has the stuff that makes you a thing, and not just nothing? Where does your mask come from? Well, only 9% of the mass of an atom comes from the particles of the atom 91% of the mass of every atom comes from the interaction between the atoms, the forces created by the protons and neutrons, generate the the 91% of the mass of you and I and the planet and the stars. Everything is a relationship between things without the relationship, the things that exist don't exist. And I love that. I mean, that is just, that's the illogical. Brian McLaren 44:05 Literally the weightiest part of the universe is its relationships. Zack Jackson 44:10 Exactly. It is it is, if you ever wanted to find a fingerprint of a relational Creator, who created a creation that continues to create, it's right there. Brian McLaren 44:20 And this is when you were talking about anticipatory Christianity. This is if if what will happen if we're given the chance to incorporate all of these magnificent understandings into our theological work, and not just be stuck under this very low ceiling of Neoplatonic philosophy? Which has its own beauties and all the rest, but you know, yeah, so all of this is one of the other reasons it's a little hard to walk away in spite of all the horrible things because somebody is going to get to do this kind of revisioning of what we mean when we say the word God, in light of all of this, and what we mean when we say the word human in light of all of this, and it's sort of would be a shame to miss miss that fun. Zack Jackson 45:15 It is fun, isn't it? Ian Binns 45:17 Well, and, you know, Reading throughout your, your book too about, you know, the interconnectedness of all things, and just the importance of, you know, stepping back from that just developing those connections and those relationships, you know, that's something that as a teacher, I do with my students, and, you know, I teach future elementary school teachers how to teach science. And so one of the first things I really focus on is not necessarily, let's get into teaching science immediately, it's, let's develop a connection to each other a relationship. And, you know, I've been told by some of my colleagues that they've always been impressed that typically by week two, I've developed a very strong rapport with my students. And I tell my students, this is my messaging to them all the time, is that if you're able to connect with your students, on a personal level in some way, you can teach them anything there is yes, yes, yes. Because they will learn to trust you and know they're in a safe space. Brian McLaren 46:21 Yes. And in the presence of that kind of respect and affection, you know, and in the presence of that, our curiosity comes out. And so then we become natural learners because we feel safe and all the rest. Oh, it's so true. And this, again, is one of the things that I think we have to realize that the Christian religion, by working so much on a base of fear and shame, creates an antagonistic environment to learning and curiosity. And it might be one of the factors in the lack of transformation we were talking about before, it makes people sort of hunker down, rather than open up. Ian Binns 47:07 Well, that's, you know, part of that, too, with developing that relationship and connection is in it kind of touches on something. Zack, you said earlier when talking about Dr. Scott, coming on, as you know, teaching people to love nature, again, is that I approached my class, also teaching them to not fear science. Yes. And to realize why it's such an incredible thing to teach. And that children are natural born scientists. Yes. Just they'll whole notion of being curious and wanting to ask a question is doing science. And so I remind them of that. And then I say, Now let's have some fun, and focus on ways to teach it. But if they can get that down, yeah, pretty quickly, we're gonna have a good time. So Brian McLaren 47:54 be a nice thing for seminarians to hear. Zack Jackson 48:00 I mentioned before we started recording, friend of mine just wrote his first book, called Jesus takes the side embracing the political demands of the gospel, his name is Johnny Rashid. By the time this episode airs, I think it'll be a week out from release. And in it, one of the things he argues is that Western Christianity doesn't have a sense of honor, but it does have a sense of shame. And most societies are honor shame based, and his family comes from Egypt, and they have a deeply ingrained system of honor and shame and honor and shame is how you keep society together, how to keep religion together, but Western Christianity has a lot of shame. But we have no systems of honor. anymore. And so we cling desperately, to our our dogma, our beliefs, our right thinking, because it is so easy to feel shame, and so hard to find honor in the system anymore. Sounds remarkable. It is. And it's it's a great book, and everyone should read it. But I think that when we're talking about reimagining the church and reimagining our faith and our religion and what it means to follow Christ. I mean, I can't think of another historical person who spent more time pouring honor on people that other people poured Seamus. Yes, yes, yes. And if we're going to reimagine this faith, I think we put that near the center. I love it. As as we're, as we're sort of wrapping up our time together. I want to I want to ask you one more question. That for me, is very full circle. Because back in 2006, I preached a sermon as a teenager, at my home church, based on your brand new book, The secret message of Jesus. A part of that book is in which you talked about how the phrase the kingdom of God doesn't work. In this post monarchical world. You know, nobody knows what a kingdom is anymore. Jesus was using a metaphor for his time that no longer works, and probably carries too many too much baggage for it to be useful. And you propose a dozen different solutions. The the, my favorite one at the time was the dream of God, that was the name of the sermon, actually just listen to the sermon today, it was very hard to listen to an 18 year old me preach a sermon. But here we are. I wonder if in the past 16 years, you've found a version of the kingdom of God that resonates deeper with you. And with the current reality, we find ourselves very Brian McLaren 50:40 much. So that's very relevant to our discussion today. You know, there, there's a chapter in the book called to free God and, and I, I have a beautiful quote from Barbara brown Taylor that plays heavily in the book and and, in fact, maybe the way for me to say the phrase is to say that I think this phrase refers to the kingdom of God. And I think it refers to God. In that chapter I talk about in do I stay Christian, I talk about the you that we refer to God, that seems to me becomes a we, because the the nature of God, it seems to me is a God of participation, who invites us into participation in the divine life. And so anyhow, the phrase is the web of life. And, in fact, I, I wrote a little table grace, that is my table grace for the last several years. And it's I just say, for this breath, for this heartbeat, for this meal with these companions. For the web of life of which were part we give thanks with all our heart. And it's an as I'm saying, the web of life. I realized, I'm not just talking about you that web of life includes God. It's a we that's God and creation in that one web. So that now I think the web is what weighs 91%, or this 91% of the mass. Zack Jackson 52:20 Yes, absolutely. It is all about how we are connected to one one, Ian Binns 52:24 if I may ask one more question. Brian is based on something you said to us at the very beginning. After you talked about your experience with Charlottesville, you said you kind of alluded to that you are concerned about things to come. Yeah. Right. So that was hard to hear. Yeah. So what gives you hope? Yeah. Because January 6 was rough. It was rough. For those of us who admit what happened. Brian McLaren 52:57 So in that's really an important question. And in fact, that's going to be at the heart of the next book I write actually. And I guess one thing I can say is the word hope used to mean for me, where do I see trend lines that make me think things might get better? And I'm not defining hope that way anymore. I'm not defining hope as having anything to do with evidence or not, not depending on evidence. And because what I expect this is what's helping me have hope, to not have to depend on evidence for things getting better. What I expect will happen is that forms of Christianity will get worse than they've ever been. I think that's almost unavoidable. I think, I can't imagine it not happening. i There are people who want it to happen, they want Christianity to become in words I would use uglier, more selfish, more vicious, more violent. And I have no hope that that will not happen, like that will happen. But here's the here's what I think, as that happens, I'm quite certain that we are seeing and we'll see extraordinarily beautiful expressions of Christian faith and other expressions of human life as well. Just because the ugliness that we'll see will will provoke many of us to step out of sort of complacency into a more vigorous and robust expression of beauty and pursuit of beauty. And, and the lies and conspiracy theories on one side will make us more passionate to actually know and face the truth and and, and, of that, of course, I do see evidence I see our conversation being evidence all The three of us are different than we were three years ago. And, and so, you know, it's just all around us. I would I was, you know, I said I was out of town. And when I was on a plane coming home this morning, as I walked down the aisle of the plane, I just had one of those kinds of grace moments, where as I walked down the aisle, I, this guy is asleep. And this woman is tending her child, and this older person is Reading a magazine. And as I'm walking down the aisle toward my seat at the back, cheap seat of the plane, I just felt this tenderness and love and saw the beauty of these people was one of those moments where you just sort of you feel every one of these people is beloved, you know, and, and I just think more and more of us are moving in that direction. But that won't stop the ugly people the ugly things from happening, and taking over more and more people's lives to so that's how I that's how I survived i i have to be able to expect the worst will happen and and the best will happen. Ian Binns 56:07 So then we'll just also have to have you back on when you finish that next book. Okay. I would like that. I would appreciate that response. Brian. That helps a lot. salutely Thanks. Yeah. Zack Jackson 56:18 The book is called do I stay Christian, a guide for the doubters, the disappointed and the disillusioned, it is available wherever you get your books as of yesterday. Brian has been such a pleasure to talk with you for the past hour. Thank you so much for carving time out of your ridiculously busy life to be Brian McLaren 56:38 such a delight. It's just been a pleasure. I'm, I feel energized and I'm so glad you're doing what you're doing. Thanks for having me on. And please keep up the good work. It's important. Thank you
Episode 105 Maggots! Bloodletting! Graverobbers! Decapitated ducks! Cornflakes! This episode has it all! Join us on this wild ride through the history of Western Medicine as we look at the breakthroughs, setbacks, prejudices, and methodology behind it. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:04 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are Kendra Holt-Moore 00:14 Kendra Holt-Moore, assistant professor of religion at Bethany College, and my most recent ailment was a concussion from a snowboarding fall, Zack Jackson 00:28 Zack Jackson, UCC pasture and Reading, Pennsylvania, and my most recent ailment was COVID. Rachael Jackson 00:36 Rachel Jackson, Rabbi Agoudas, Israel congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina, my most recent ailment is real, pretty bland, but irritating nonetheless. It's just a headache. But it was one of those headaches that I couldn't get rid of a headache for no reason. And I felt like oh my god, I'm just old, I now just get headaches. Ian Binns 01:01 And Ben's Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte. And my most recent ailment is arthritis in my right hand, where this part is where the thumb comes down and connects to the wrist. It is definitely confirmed no longer early onset arthritis. So yeah, that was fun. 01:26 Why did you why did you ask her this question? Ian Binns 01:29 For two reasons. One, because we just passed your birthday, Rachel. So celebration. Rachael Jackson 01:38 Your old everything hurts. Just adding the parenthetical aside, Everybody Hurts from REM is an amazing song from 1992. And it's younger than Ian Binns 01:50 I am interested. No, yeah, no, that was out before? No. When were you born again, Kendra. 1991. See, so 01:58 nothing hurt, then. I was fresh. Ian Binns 02:05 The second reason that we're asking this question is because we're starting our new mini series, our next mini series on healing. So for today, I'm gonna give a just a very quick crash course, in kind of the history of healing from a science perspective. And I will let our listeners know that my background and understanding this is definitely more than the western science. So please, if anyone hears this and says, hey, you've left out some cultures, historical cultures that I do apologize for that. But as I said, this is gonna be very brief. So we could do several episodes just on the history of medicine. But so anyway, so I kind of wanted to just give some general, interesting things that have occurred over time. And then we wanted us to be able to get into a conversation about, like medical treatments, for different ailments, as well. But some of our understanding of the history of medicine goes all the way back to prehistoric times. And this is where I think it will come into play throughout our series as well, of how different cultures used to attribute different types of magic or religion to ailments, you know, maybe it was something to do with evil spirits or something like that. But you know, supernatural origin versus more of a natural origin of reason for different ailments. But one of the things that we know from the discovery of different prehistoric skulls is that they would actually drill a hole into the skull of the victim, because they believe that that the speculation is and then we actually see this occurred in more recent human history that it would release the disease. And so that was one thanks, you mean patient? Did I sit victim, you get saved. Because you know, if Zack Jackson 03:54 you're going to your show, and your hands Ian Binns 03:56 are gonna drill during prehistoric times, and you're gonna knock a hole into the person's skull, they may end up being the victim. Right? So, so yeah, there you go. And then now we were going to jump ahead to ancient Egypt, when we start actually seeing some evidence of written evidence of different types of treatments and medicine. One examples from the what was called the Smith Papyrus, written in 1600 BCE, right around there. But it was actually we believe it was a copy of a text from much earlier, so roughly 3000 BCE, but in that particular Papyrus, that's now I think, in New York. It contained 48 case studies. There was no theory for anything, but it was an observation and kind of a recording of what it is that they knew. So the case studies were all written, same way, the title, the examination, so what they're observing, and then the diagnosis, and then the treatment, and then they will have a glossary for terms. But again, they were still be speculation about what role Old Evil forces or spirits play in the cause of diseases. And then we're gonna jump ahead more to ancient Greece. And this is where many people may have heard of Hippocrates, of Coase Brahm, circa BCE, or for 20 BC, he was one of the first people who kind of focused on natural explanations trying to move away from supernatural explanations. And he was one of the people who came up with the idea of the four humors, which those are blood, yellow bile, black bile, and phlegm. And if you are healthy, that means the four humors are in balance, if you were not healthy, that means something was off, one of the humors was off. And so this is where we start getting the idea of bloodletting. So for example, if someone had a fever, it was due to an abundance of blood. And so they would do bloodletting as a way to cure the fever. But still, at this time, and again, I'm skipping over a lot of people. They learned different things with anatomy, but they were only allowed to dissect animals, because at the time, it was illegal to dissect humans. At which time, still 420 BCE. So this is still the BCE era, ancient, Zack Jackson 06:13 ancient really, that sounds more like a Christian hang up than agree. Yeah. Well, and actually to Ian Binns 06:17 this, and trying to prepare for today's episode, I did see in some of the more ancient eastern cultures of like Hinduism, and from the early early stages of that, that they were also not allowed to cut into the human body and dissect human bodies either. So this is not just in that area. But yeah, you're right, because, Zack, as you just said, that we see that all the way up into the 1500s that they weren't supposed to be dissecting humans in in Europe, for example, but they did not necessarily figure out the reason or the causes of the different parts of the body that they were removing from the body. So when it came to anatomy, who the Egyptians from my from my understanding, or my off on that, which I find that's Zack Jackson 07:01 fine, it depends. The the Ebers papyrus and again, all these papyrus papyrus papyrus Pappa Ria, I don't know if the plural is. The Papyrus is they are named after the the hippopotami Yes, sorry. They're all happy to discover they're all named there. No, not the Discover. They're named after the white guys who bought it at auction and then brought it back to their country. So, you know, all of Egyptian treasures are in Europe or America somewhere instead of where they belong. But anyway, Ian Binns 07:35 yeah, the Smith Paul Bader is probably wasn't named for a guy named Smith all that back then. Zack Jackson 07:40 Right now Pharaoh Smith. No, that's not really an Egyptian name. But the Ebers papyrus was in 1550 BCE, and it had a really detailed explanation of the heart and the entire circulatory system. It was a bit wrong in some of the ways in that they thought that the the heart pumps all fluids. So that includes urine and semen as well as as blood, but they understood the purpose of of the blood going through the muscles and the veins and the arteries and all of that they actually also had some psychiatric conditions that were tied up in conditions of the heart. And they mentioned like dementia and depression, which were problems of the heart because they would dissect people after they died and look at the quality of their ventricles and all of that. So they didn't know what the brain was. They thought that was garbage. But the heart was the center of Ian Binns 08:37 all thank you for correcting me, Zack, I forgot about that Papyrus. Papyrus? popularized by Bob Yes, go ahead, Rachel. Zack Jackson 08:46 Papyrus hippopotami Rachael Jackson 08:47 I was just going to add that because things are because things are so ancient, we tend to forget that there was we say Egyptian. We're looking at 1000s and 1000s of years when we say Ancient Egypt, so 1500 BCE is kind of the middle right? Middle late kingdom, right? This is the these are the new kingdoms. Were this is not, these are not the ones that built those giant pyramids. That's 1000 years earlier that they did that. So I think when we when we talk about that we should do a little bit of justice and say, hey, it would sort of be like saying, hey, all Englanders life for all time, right? Well, that's just been 2000 years like it's at some point. So just to add to that piece and same thing with the the Greek piece or the ancient Greek has been around for a very long time. That's that's the history not the Zack Jackson 09:45 speaking of the history piece to in about in the 1200s or so BCE, there was this mysterious Bronze Age collapse in which these massive societies, the ancient Egyptians, the Mycenaeans, all the the the Hittite They just they just collapsed. And we're not entirely sure why possibly the sea peoples possibly climate change, possibly a million other things, aliens, if you watch the History Channel, but all of these amazing societies, the Minoans, another one, they all just disappeared. And so you see later Greek society and later Egyptian society, then trying to make sense of the fact that there are these ancient ruins that are massive, and they just assume that ancient heroes built them, which is where a lot of the mythology comes from. But so like this sort of understanding of anatomy and health was probably somewhat lost in going into the period that now you're talking about where people aren't allowed to dissect. So we see them now because we found the papyrus, but they may not have had them Ian Binns 10:46 as well. So Zach, you mentioned, you know, of that massive loss of civilization around that timeframe? And you mentioned your seafaring people to a man, are you talking about Atlantis there, buddy? Zack Jackson 11:01 I am actually the Minoans. We're probably the source of the Atlantean myth as far as Ian Binns 11:07 because wasn't Plato, one of the first ones to talk about it. Plato was the first one to write right about that we have documentation. Zack Jackson 11:14 It's an Egyptian story that Plato heard and wrote about that there's this island nation that was super advanced in technology and in society, and then they angered Poseidon, right, and then they were wiped out by the sea for their iniquities. And so that lines up really nicely with the Minoan people who were on Crete, who at the time, I mean, we're talking 1500 BCE. Further back had like three storey buildings with hot and cold running water, and indoor plumbing. They had amazing art and architecture. They were they they were doing things that 1000s of years later, people hadn't discovered. And then they were just they were hit by this massive tsunami after the oh, what's that, that place in Greece that everyone goes on vacation with the beautiful blue waters of Santorini the volcano there exploded and caused caused dust it caused tsunamis and basically wiped out their society and in the Mycenaeans conquered them, and then the Bronze Age collapse. So we forgot all about them for 1000s of years, but they were probably the inspiration of Atlantis. It's not aliens, sorry. It's probably just Minoans. It's a bummer. Yeah, well, this has been Zach ruins mythology for you. Kendra Holt-Moore 12:31 A new segment? I love that. Yeah, exactly. Ian Binns 12:33 You could just splice this out and move it to the end. So let's get back to because I think while we're doing this to it's interesting, you all I am going to be focusing mostly on how we start to see more of a focus on natural phenomena, natural explanations and a scientific approach to medicine, that you still do see, you know, and like Apocrypha as being one of the individuals again from 420 BCE, trying to move away from Supernatural that even with the work of Hippocrates, that it did not drive out, like the rivals, you know, long that more traditional forms of healing up to that point, those those are traditional forms of healing belief and practice that those still existed. So it's not like when his work and and his contemporaries, you know, and then actually, there's speculation that Hippocrates was multiple people. It was not one. And so, just because of that, though, it did not drive out this the more traditional ways of belief and practices all say, so then I'm going to jump ahead roughly 500 years to Rome, and Galen. So Galen was a individuals from 129, to circa 200 CE. And he really started getting into this notion of we need to rely on the world of our senses. And but he still accepted the idea of the four humors that was originally proposed by Hippocrates. He recognized the arteries contain blood and not merely air, he also showed how the heart sets blood in motion, but he did not have an idea about the whole notion of circulation, blood circulation, but he was he did start figuring out that, you know, the heart did move things at least a little bit. We definitely see evidence with control experimentation with Galen key focus on on anatomy, but again, at the timeframe, dissection of humans was illegal. And so his work was focusing on animals, their section of animals, and it's his work. That actually kind of stayed when you think about Western culture and Western medicine, kind of was the prevailing view of how things were done until the 1500s. was actually the reason why I remember that so much is with that part, because his work was occurring rather right around the time of Ptolemy, when he talked about astronomy, and that stayed around for roughly the same Not a time till you know, Copernicus work. So it was kind of all those things started happening right around the same time. So now again, you know, my apologies for leaving out multiple cultures that I want to jump ahead again now to Medieval and Renaissance Europe. And so as I said galas, views kind of held strong until roughly the 1500s. And this is when we see Andreas alias, emerge. And yes, there were others before him, but he was one of the first ones to really get into dissection of humans. I think he had he was a person who had students who were grave robbers, because it was still illegal at the time. But he realized that we needed for anatomy, we needed a better understanding and body so he would have his students would become grave robbers and steal the bodies, and then they would do special dissections, you know, for like a show. I mean, there were many, many people watching, but they would have lookouts to make sure that they weren't doing anything, they wouldn't get caught. Zack Jackson 15:58 Do you put them back? I don't know that after you're done? No. 16:02 I would hope so. Yeah, Ian Binns 16:03 you think so? Rachael Jackson 16:04 I would think so. Not just think so. Ian Binns 16:08 Yeah. Then apparently he was a very skilled Dissector. And he felt like you know, it was they had to move away from Galen and his views. And don't forget, you know, I said, you know, we're jumping time. This was 1400 years later. So Galen, his views held strong for a long time. But he did a lot of dissection of humans. And his scientific observations and methods, with these facilities show that Galen can no longer be regarded as the final authority. And so that's when we start to see and again, this is also aligned with the time of the Renaissance. That's when we start seeing movement away from more ancient understandings when it comes to science, to medicine, for example, he believed in the importance of empirical knowledge, independent observation and experimentation. So this alias is really into those types of things. I don't know if he was ever caught. I have to look into that one. Yeah, Zack Jackson 17:04 well, now he Oh, yeah. You blew his cover, man. Ian Binns 17:07 Sorry, sorry, everybody. But what's interesting is even when that was occurring, we were also still seeing some people who were holding on to the idea that, you know, while experimentation is important that we still need to Paracelsus was one of them. I think I'm saying that correct. He presents the idea that humans are the ultimate ends of God's creation. So the ultimate form he held on is something called a chemical philosophy, which is a Christian philosophy. But it was not very widely accepted at the time, because as I've already said, this is the time of the Renaissance. So we're trying to move away from those types of explanations. And so he was still around, but he was trying to blend the two, between experimentation, but also to hold into the importance of God and humans kind of being the ultimate form. And then the next person I want to talk about before we start really going into different types of ailments stuff, just because of, as I said, the history as William Harvey, he was 15, seven 816 57. So he advanced medicine even further, because of careful observation, experimentation, he really focused on collecting more evidence. And this is when we really start to see what we now think of as experimentations. So, you know, control experimentation manipulate in nature, so he can see something that normally would not be seen, he came up with the theory of the circulation of blood of blood. So we started trying to have a better understanding how blood circulated throughout the body. And again, you know, he still was someone who did believe in the impact of a designer, but he really focused on the more natural explanations. Zack Jackson 18:46 It's interesting that you say that he he discovered the circulation of the blood when we just said that 3000 years earlier, the Egyptians knew about the circuit. Oh, you're right. Ian Binns 18:56 Yeah. Yeah, and plumbing, and plumbing, 19:02 plumbing, our own and in the world, but it Ian Binns 19:05 is fascinating historical texts still hold us like William Harvey is one of the people who really did that. Zack Jackson 19:11 Well, God forbid, they credited an African for exactly discovering yessing. Ian Binns 19:17 And so just because of, you know, because I really want us to get into conversations around like different types of treatments we see throughout history for different ailments. You know, this was the time of the Renaissance. When you start moving past that. I mean, you as we've seen, we've discussed throughout on this show, in the past about the history of science and how scientific advancements just took off during this timeframe. Incredibly fast, right. And it was the same for medical medical advancements, too. And so we continue to see lots of different changes over time to the point where we are to our today, but what I really want to focus on unless someone wants to talk more about other history is getting into these treatments that we see throughout history. If we can Zack Jackson 19:59 Yeah, That's absolutely yeah, you're chomping at the bit over there. You want to talk about about some some trees. Ian Binns 20:05 So because one of my hat, like asthma, so asthma used to be treated, it was treated by smoking. Zack Jackson 20:16 Oh, yes, smoking pipe of Ian Binns 20:19 tobacco or cigar has the power of relieving a fit of asthma, especially in those not accustomed to it, Zack Jackson 20:26 which I thought was really amazing custom to tobacco. Ian Binns 20:29 That was this. That was the argument being presented is amazing. Yeah. There's an when when ish was this it was more like the 1800s. 20:39 Oh, recent. Zack Jackson 20:40 Yeah. Well, counterpoint. No, that is not don't don't smoke, if you have so please Ian Binns 20:47 understand that these are old, not accurate. There's a another thing with the whole idea of smoking. Yeah. For Your Health. This is. Back in the late 19th, early 20th century, I found a site talks about these different types of treatments out there smoking, for your health, asthma cigarettes. Yeah. So and they were this is an advertisement, not recommended for children under six. That was nice. But they were actually called asthma cigarettes. And they effectively treat asthma hay fever, foul breath, all diseases of throat, head colds, canker sores, bronchial irritations. So yeah, so that was a good thing. Zack Jackson 21:30 Well, so when you're talking 19th, and 20th century, and these are like some crazy, wacky solutions for things like when they would give cocaine to children for their cough, and all of that. That's not entirely like saying that the ancient Romans used electric eels to cure hemorrhoids. Which, which is real? Well, when we're in the 19th and 20th centuries, a lot of these are the companies understood the awful things that their, their their products did to people, but they made marketing false advertisements to sell these addictive things to people. You know, the Bayer Corporation knew all about the addictive qualities of cocaine and still pushed it as a as a simple pain reliever, because they could get people addicted to it. And like those sorts of predatory capitalism has existed for the past couple of 100 years with with pharmaceuticals, and we are paying that price now with the opioid epidemic. So when the smoking industry in the 1800s, they didn't understand that it gave cancer, obviously, but they knew it wasn't good. Yeah, no, those advertisements are intentionally misleading, because there was no oversight. Ian Binns 22:49 Well, and earlier, I referred to bloodletting. And, you know, was talking about, you know, ancient, ancient Greece, you know, and for 400 BCE, bloodletting did not just end then, bloodletting was something that was continued for a very long time, for centuries. And Rachael Jackson 23:06 right, and I believe, and I have not fact check this. So someone else has please correct me or collaborate, whichever it might be. I said, No, we're doing stuff about presidents. And a little factoid that I heard was that George Washington got a fever, just like you're saying in and at that time. It's George Washington, early, early 19th century, and he got a fever. And so they decided to do bloodletting. And they did bloodletting twice on him. So much, so that he died. Oh, good. I have not, I have not double checked that fact. But I also haven't seen anything to contradict it. So yeah, take that with a grain of salt as it may. But that was, it was all the way up until George Washington is when they were really still using this as a technique to cure people from things like fevers, which are very, very dangerous, but unless you have something to just take down the fever, you're either gonna live it or you're like, or you're not. Zack Jackson 24:12 Yeah, the Constitution Center. Constitution. center.org says that that process of bloodletting probably let about 40% of his blood supply, right. So you can't really make it through a sickness with 40% of your blood supply. Rachael Jackson 24:28 Right. So imagine I mean, think about when you donate blood do the three of you donate blood any on a regular or at all ever works. I Ian Binns 24:37 grew up in Europe. Right? Yeah, Mad Cow Disease just because people don't know. Rachael Jackson 24:43 Yeah. Yeah. Zack, do you ever Zack Jackson 24:48 know I don't I don't I mostly have issues with needles. Yeah, exactly. What me not to Rachael Jackson 24:53 Yeah, don't do that. better for everybody that you don't go to the hospital for donating blood. Kendra Holt-Moore 24:58 Drive was can So I think because of a COVID related thing, but I would like to, but I haven't. Rachael Jackson 25:06 Yeah, yeah, it's one of those like really simple, really useful things that if a person is healthy and no guilt, no judgment. For anyone that does or doesn't, you can do it every 56 days, and they take about a leader. And generally speaking, people, adults have five to six leaders. And they say, Okay, you're gonna feel queasy, don't do any weightlifting, don't do anything strenuous for a minimum of 24 hours. Like, you've got to just take it real easy, and you have to be healthy when you donate, because your body needs every blood cell that it has when it's healthy, or when it's sick. And when it's healthy. Yeah, we've got an extra 20%. So let's give it away. But if you take more than that, you're not going to survive very well. And then if you take more than that, and you're sick, your body has no ability to fight off the diseases, right? We talk about blood cells all the time, and the white blood cell counts and red blood cells. And how do we think we were just talking about the circulation system? Right, the circulatory? How do you think all of those good anti me when your immune system actually gets to these infections through your bloodstream? And if you don't have a good flowing bloodstream? Right, if this is August, after a rough summer, it's not happening. Zack Jackson 26:29 So I know that in modern medicine, they still do use leeches, there are medical legions, and they're usually used to drain excess blood or like, you know, pooling of blood and hematoma hematomas. Is that the thing? Because it's, it's sanitary. And it's easier. And if people are willing to have a leech on him for a while, then it's great. But like, historically, bloodletting has been around for very Ian Binns 26:56 long, 1000s and 1000s. Like, Zack Jackson 27:00 it must have worked at least a little bit, or else they wouldn't have kept doing it. Right. Rachael Jackson 27:06 But don't you think correlation and causation comes into play here. But people get people get better, regardless of what we tried to do them. And so just because someone got better doesn't mean that what we did to them made them better? Well, so Zack Jackson 27:23 like, there's an old remedy, in which if you got bit by a snake, you would take a duck and put its butt on the wound, and then cut its head off. And then while the bite is on the wound, and the thought was that it would suck out the poison, Ian Binns 27:37 the dung Would Suck out the poison. Zack Jackson 27:40 Yes, yes. Yes. Everyone knows this wanted Ian Binns 27:42 to make that claim. I'm quite excited about that. Zack Jackson 27:47 Like that. That didn't stick. Yeah. But like draining people have their a painful procedure that is gross, and makes me feel queasy thinking about that stuck around for 1000s of years where like, is there any kind of medical benefit? Like even in obviously not in Washington's case, like if you have an infection, don't get rid of your blood? But like, what that stimulates SIBO antibodies to then like go to the wound, or like adrenaline to help boost the system? What? Are any of you familiar with any positives of blood lead? I Kendra Holt-Moore 28:28 not? I'm not answering this question to like, describe physiological processes, but the placebo effect is extremely powerful. Like in just the study of medicine, like contemporary researchers, there are some who have done a lot of really interesting work on placebo effects. And obviously, like, we don't have the same kind of data to, like, you know, like double, double blind study results of placebo effects for like, ancient practices, ancient cultures, but I think, you know, cross culturally, all human societies, we all do things that, you know, as Rachel said, we can't really like tie a causation thread between those practices and healing in a definitive way, but a lot of what we do, we do for like cultural or, you know, comfort reasons. And even that is like different than placebo, which, in a lot of cases, like the placebo effect does actually change. Like it does lead to physiological changes. And it's kind of like weird and mysterious, but I think that I think that's not something to take for granted or under appreciate. Because, you know, I think even like early psychological studies showing, you know, if you're in a situation shift where you're around like comforting, familiar people and a comforting, familiar environment, you just fare better. Like even if we're not talking about injury, you fare better in terms of your, like mental health, mental well being, which translates to sometimes like physical well being. And that, you know, those are, those are things that are, I think, often considered, like, non essential pieces of the healing process. But, but yet, we we all, you know, like there are studies to show that people care about a doctor's bedside manner. People care about having, you know, chaplains come into hospital settings to, to support people and that that, that does facilitate something real in terms of healing. But it's it's just not, there's not like a clear, like, hard scientific way of describing that necessarily, but I that it's not to say that it's like not important also. Rachael Jackson 31:04 Yeah, I would, I would add that, you know, you were just talking to Kendra about hospitals. But also previous to that you were saying, in places where people are surrounded and around things that they're comfortable with, the best healing happens when you're not in a hospital. Right. Hospital is no place for a sick person. I mean, and I mean, that my dad, my dad, was now a doctor said that, to me, it's like, that makes perfect sense. Because to really, unless you're really sick, and you can't be at home, being at home is your best chance of getting better. And I'm using that word intentionally, right, getting closer to a cure and your sense of normal, faster than being in a hospital, and that hospitals are there for the very, very sick people who cannot be at home for whatever reason. So it's one of those other reasons like stay away from a hospital. Also, they just have a lot of germs still stay away from a hospital. Unless, again, you have no other alternative. And so, you know, to answer Zach's question there too, I think the idea of Zack, you were kind of recoiling from the achiness of leeches. And I wonder, are the bloodletting perspective? I wonder if part of the causation and the correlation might be, you're now treating a person differently. You're giving them advantages. Maybe you're giving them more soup, maybe you're giving them more fluids? Maybe you're treating them differently, because Oh, it's so serious that we have to call a doctor in or whoever, whatever their title was, whoever was giving the leeches, the priests perhaps, right, that now they're so different that their everydayness is being being treated differently. You give them the extra blanket, you give them the soup, you take them outside, like whatever it is, that that's really what's happening. And so yes, the leeches are helping but only as a secondary issue. Zack Jackson 33:08 That reminds me of the correlation causation argument around the increased health of religious people. We've heard that those numbers thrown around a lot that people who regularly are connected to religious communities are healthier live longer than people that don't. Right. Yeah. And the argument from the religious perspective is that well, faithful people have God, and God heals you. And prayer works. And so prayer prayer for people are healthy people. When the opposite argument is then yeah, the opposite argument is that, well, you're connected to a religious community, you've got people that care for you, you've got people that come by There's comfort, there's there's connection, there's soup delivered to your door every day. And those intangibles are what caused the the health and the healing. Yeah, Kendra Holt-Moore 33:58 and the direction of the correlation is not always clear, if you're looking at like study results. So if you're healthy and able bodied, to like get to your church, or synagogue or whatever, then you can, you can do that. But you were already healthy from the starting point. Whereas if you're like chronically ill and unable to get out of bed, then maybe you don't go to a religious service, because you're not able to but the starting point, the kind of direction of behavior was influenced by the status of your health rather than, like the status of your religiosity. And that that whole like body of literature is like, really, really vast. And it is really interesting, but it's a good, good examples to bring up when we're talking about correlation. Ian Binns 34:48 Yeah. But Zack, you asked earlier about, you know, why did bloodletting last for so long? I mean, there is, you know, I just started remembering that there are certain Um, chronic diseases, blood diseases that people will have, or blood cancers that will have where it will produce too much either iron and their blood or too much red blood cells. And the way they do that, the way that one of the treatments for that is a phlebotomy and so, which is the removal of amount, a specific amount of blood, it's more than just going in and doing a donation, for example. And so I and that is done for medical purposes, like my dad used to have to do that, because of a blood disease that he had. And so, I saw I started very quickly looking at what is the difference between bloodletting and phlebotomy? And some of this is just saying that bloodletting was a therapeutic practice that started in antiquity, but that there still flub a lot. Phlebotomy is another way of saying bloodletting 35:57 is, when you go rolled, it's phlebotomist. Correct? It's the person that takes Ian Binns 36:01 control now than it used to be. Right. Yeah. 36:03 Or at least, we think it's Ian Binns 36:07 yes. Zack Jackson 36:08 Yeah. So one of the things I wanted, so I want to be cautious about to when we talk about old, older treatments, you know, the cutting off the duck's head and how ridiculous it is, or the how they used to use urine to whiten their teeth. You know, stuff, stuff like that, where we can easily look back at those folksy unintelligent people and say, My goodness, aren't we so intelligent? Today, we have science and science has given us all the answers. And those of you who might be listening at home or have people in your lives, who you've talked to about sorts of things, well, then, you know, get kind of, rightly upset at the sort of hubris of that, that there's there's medicine, and then there's alternative medicine, and alternative medicine is based just on placebo and fantasies and dreams. And real medicine is based on science and truth. And I think Modern medicine is wonderful. And it has given us so much more trust in the process and understanding the why of things work. But that a lot of what we have in modern medicine is based on traditional medicine. You know, the ancient Ancient Egyptians knew that if you had pain, or inflammation or fever that you could chew on birch bark, and it would reduce those things. And it wasn't until much later that that's how we got aspirin now, or I think of penicillin just comes from what mold. And how many of like indigenous cultures will watch the way that nature interacts with itself. And then we'll gain lessons from that, you know, watching what this animal eats when they eat it. And then using that and applying that and finding that those things work. And only much, much, much, much later do we discover the scientific rationale for it. And we're seeing sort of a resurgence in the past couple of decades of people taking indigenous medicines seriously and looking for like the whys of why these things have stuck around for so long. And lots of times discovering that there is there is wisdom behind these traditions. And the whole colonial Western mindset of it's our way, or it's just fantasy is not all that helpful. Rachael Jackson 38:36 Thank you for that perspective, I think we do need to, you know, recognize our own bias. And also recognize, you know, as we're sort of talking about the with the tobacco industry, that there's a lot of push with marketing, and there's a lot of issues in those ways that we're all very susceptible to that came out of this trusting of the scientific process. And just because it's old, doesn't mean it is old and unscientific doesn't mean that it's not also helpful. Right. So putting that caveat also, Zack Jackson 39:10 sometimes they are awful. Do the old things, you know, like we if you have syphilis at home, do not inject mercury into your urethra, because that does not work. Right, despite the fact that Blackbeard did it. And 39:27 well, and I think too, are there other are there other? Oh, sorry. Yeah. Well, Ian Binns 39:31 just real quick, you know, you talk about this, and I think this will be, you know, what you're just discussing, Zach, you know, and wanting to be respectful. And one of the people I hope to get on the show sometime is David distinto, who wrote the book, how God works. And in this particular book, I mean, he is talking in some situations about healing, you know, and says early on, I'm not finished yet but you know, it's says I realized that the surprise of my colleagues and I felt when we saw evidence of religions benefits was a sign of our hubris. Born of a common notion among scientists, all of religion was superstition, and therefore could have little practical benefit is that learned and as this book shows, spiritual leaders often understood in ways that we can now scientifically confirm how to help people live better lives. And so that he is someone I really, you know, reach out to him see if we can get him on the show, because I think that's some interesting research he's done to show. You know, what is it we're learning now? And how it's applicable to helping others but another one I wanted to bring up was the notion of maggot therapy. 40:44 Oh, yes, yeah. Which I've done a little bit Ian Binns 40:47 here, but if you know more, please, but Zack Jackson 40:51 which I now say it Rachel hates bugs. 40:57 I do leeches all day long. But maggots. Zack Jackson 40:59 I got this don't talk about Ian Binns 41:01 this great book called strange science, wonderful. All these cool things in here, but one of them is pages on maggot therapy. And it says it sounds like something from a horror film fat cream colored maggots eating their way through infected sores and wounds. It's not its medicine. Rachel, says Rachel right there. Since it's so sad since ancient times, doctors have used Magus to prevent wounds from getting infected, and the 1940s Antibiotics replace maggots. But bacteria adapted and started to become resistant to antibiotics. And now we get the return of the maggots. Maggots work by secreting digestive enzymes that feed on dead tissue. Those enzymes also killed bacteria and a wound and speed up healing. Doctors are placed between 203 100 maggots on a wound then cover it maggots and all with mesh beneath the mesh the maggots feed for 48 to 72 hours. When they're done, the doctors remove them. wounds that haven't healed for months even years often respond quickly to maggot medicine. And I really am hopeful this is a video clip we need to share of the wonderful reactions we're seeing from both Rachel and Kendra Rachael Jackson 42:25 I'm just gonna be real public about this. If I'm ever in a situation where I'd not have a wound that heals and the only thing that could cure me is Maga therapy. Just put me out of my misery. Just don't Zack Jackson 42:38 just go to Rachael Jackson 42:42 the blog, the blog and I'm like, kill the maggots like don't even just all amputate or that's I respect people that go through that so much. I'm not one of them. I think that never having that issue. Kendra Holt-Moore 42:54 You can put the maggots on me but then also punch me in the face and knock me out. 43:02 Alright, so I'll be dead and Kendra will be unconscious. Yeah. And South could be loving every minute. Zack Jackson 43:09 As well of bugs. Sorry. Yeah. 43:11 All right, Ian, where are you? Where do you fall on this this highly nutritious Zack Jackson 43:14 to after they're done? Yeah, he's just you can just kill them and dry them and then eat them and then you get all your personal flesh. Then you get the nutrients back. Well should you 43:28 cook in your body, Zack Jackson 43:34 because they know either way you deal with with insects. You take the insects you suffocate them in a box of carbon dioxide so you don't squish them or anything. Then you take them out and you dehydrate them and then you crush them into a powder and add that into your food. That's the best Ian Binns 43:50 way to by any chance interview all seasons we're talking about maggots. Zack Jackson 43:55 Can we continue for the rest of the episode? Rachel? Ian Binns 44:00 Yes, that's another video clip needs to be shared of Rachel doing the gagging reflex each time I talk about maggots. She's like well Kendra Holt-Moore 44:09 I feel bad for Rachel. 44:11 Like I don't I'm not queasy, but now I guess I Ian Binns 44:15 will. So let's let's get into another discussion. Then. Kellogg's cornflakes. Now I'd found a very Kendra Holt-Moore 44:21 good transition away from dear listener. Zack Jackson 44:27 Now that's a segue Ian Binns 44:28 dear listener. So when I mentioned Kellogg's cornflakes prior to recording, both Rachael and Kendra have perked up and seemed to know more information about this than I did. And so I will only share the very little bit of information I have but please reach and Kindle Kendra jump in and tell us what you know about the Kellogg's cornflakes but from what I have read is that Jay is Kellogg one of the people who developed Kellogg's cornflakes he was a medical doctor and health activist and he created the cornflakes. He was one of the people who created any hope that they would prevent sexual urges or more specifically to inhibit the urge to masturbate. And so Rachel, Kendra, you reacted earlier what what did you know? Because this took me by complete surprise because it didn't work. So Kendra Holt-Moore 45:14 I was gonna say, Rachel, you go because I have to go it's like noon. I don't really have that much to add, either. I just I know that that is a statement. Ian Binns 45:26 Do we not want to then talk about the very last one about hysteria before Kendra leaves? Rachael Jackson 45:29 We can keep talking about it. I think she's she's got it. Yeah, I Kendra Holt-Moore 45:32 mean, I'm gonna say Good. Might have to, like 30 seconds thing Ian Binns 45:35 for anyone to tell us about hysteria. Kendra. Wow. Zack Jackson 45:36 Don't eat cornflakes. Just stick with Cheerios. Cheerios make you horny. So you know that's Ian Binns 45:44 the science apparently Kendra Holt-Moore 45:45 bowl of cereal if you feel nothing. Zack Jackson 45:50 Just cereal? If you want to feel nothing at all. Kendra Holt-Moore 45:55 Land bland, bland cereal for a bland, bland sex life. That's Sorry. All right, see you later. 46:06 Cool. J cereal. Zack Jackson 46:09 So what kind of what kind of like sexy breakfast? Was he trying to? Ian Binns 46:13 I don't know. Rachel, can you help us out? Rachael Jackson 46:16 So I think I'm in the same same boat of it was a factoid that I very much knew and held on to. But beyond that, I don't have a whole lot of information. I mean, the idea is, you know, everyone has breakfast. And so to prevent those urges in the morning, which and also just let's just clarify something here. When they say masturbation, they really mean men. Yeah, I'm sorry. Nobody, nobody. Yeah. Right. And so basically throughout time, and this was a religious issue. And so it wasn't a doctor issue. It was a religious issue of male masturbation is against God, going all the way back to some genesis of Don't spill your seed and, and Leviticus and stuff like that. But it's bad idea to spill your seed and that got translated into don't masturbate. And so as a religious idea, and if you look at men, generally speaking, I think we were talking about this maybe a couple of weeks ago to in the morning, men generally have more of how to say this, erect penises based on what was going on in the evenings, and the dreams and their inability to regulate their own erections. And so if that's the first thing you do in the morning to stop that have cold, dry cereal. Well, something that's bland, Zack Jackson 47:56 and I will, let's also say, Kellogg, as a human, Mr. Kellogg himself was a bit of an anti sex fanatic, that the man was married, and still never had sex, and wrote books about how he and his wife never had sex. And they lived in separate bedrooms, and they adopted their children. And that sex pollutes the body. And it's the worst thing in the world. And so, like, this guy was afraid of his body, right? And again, not want anyone else's body. Yeah, he Rachael Jackson 48:28 did this in a religious context. He didn't do it just because he was asexual and thought everyone else shouldn't be too. Yeah, I'm not a sexual anti-sex. So Ian Binns 48:37 I will say this. And so I did look it up. And so and, you know, this is now I'm getting this from Snopes. And you know, there could be good or bad things getting things. So but according to snopes.com, so the claim, what is the you know, the Kellogg's cornflakes were originally created an effort to discourage American consumers from masturbating. And as you said, Rachel, it's male, actually, so it should say that the rating is mostly false. And so what this they're saying what is true is that the creation of cornflakes was part of JH Kellogg's broader advocacy for a plain bland diet without referring to cornflakes in particular, Kellogg elsewhere recommended a plain bland diet as one of several methods to discourage masturbation. So can I guess that was a people just put that together? Zack Jackson 49:34 Can I just read a little quote from one of his books, please do other way. So he talks about onanism, which Rachel alluded to is a story of Odin from where we're in Scripture, are we? That is that is where he's supposed to consummate this. 49:55 So this is the story of this is in Genesis in Judah Genesis. Yeah. This is Zack Jackson 50:01 and where he's supposed to impregnate his brother's widow, and then spills the seed on the ground because Rachael Jackson 50:08 he doesn't want to because he wants the child to be his own and not be his brother's his dead brother's wife's son, and therefore all the dead brother's property goes to him and he doesn't then have a son. So instead of doing that, they just like, Zack Jackson 50:26 so then God knocks him out. Right, so, so he talks about onanism. So when he talks about onanism, he's talking about masturbation. He says neither plague nor war nor smallpox have produced results so disastrous to humanity as the pernicious habit of onanism. Such a victim dies literally by his own hand. Yeah, such a victim dies literally by his own answer. You must have been so happy with that line. Can you imagine him writing that out? And he's like, Oh, this is a killer. This is good. This is good. This is good. He dies by his own hand. Oh, I gotta show this to someone. Rachael Jackson 51:04 Yeah. Also, let's just add to who this person was. He spent 30 years of his life dedicated to promoting eugenics. Ian Binns 51:15 Yes, he did. So near the end of his life, Rachael Jackson 51:18 whether or not there was the direct cornflakes is for masturbation, it was promoted by a person who was anti sexual and pro eugenic to donate. You know, that's the history Zack Jackson 51:33 of cornflakes. Yeah. Meanwhile, recent research has found that for most people, sex is actually super healthy. For a person's like continued health and well, being mentally, physically, emotionally, releases all kinds of amazing hormones and good things into your body. And like a lot of religions throughout history have have have recognized that have seen, like Judaism, spiritual ecstasy, like orgasm is like spiritual ecstasy. That's like the moment of connection to the divine. This breaking forth between the natural and the the supernatural. And this thin place and spirituality have, like, celebrated that. And I think we're coming back around to that. That's a good thing. Right? Oh, Christianity is still lagging far, far, far behind. Thank you some combination of Plato and Augustine, but we're getting there. You know, Rachael Jackson 52:37 maybe it's kind of like Plumbing. Right? They had an ancient Egypt, and then it took like, one or 2000 years to come back. Yeah. Zack Jackson 52:48 Yeah. Yeah. So Rachael Jackson 52:49 you know, your plumbing. Yeah. Not quite, not quite that way. But no, my Jewish comment, my Jewish comment was that Judaism sees, and by Judaism, big broad stroke brush using right here, normative ancient orthodoxy style, Judaism saw sex only within a marital heterosexual concept. But inside those boundaries, yay, more of it. Also, it's a double mitzvah, it's a doubly good thing to do on Shabbat, the day that we're supposed to be the highest connected to God. And this was one of the ways to be even more connected to the Divine was through sex with your spouse. And I was thinking, as you're talking about Kellogg to how they didn't have sex, even though they were married. One of the things in an ancient Catawba marriage document, given it to the wife was written that if the husband doesn't fulfill his side of the contract, because, well, he doesn't or he's dead, then she gets XY and Z things, you know, 50 chickens, a sheep or whatever. Depends on what she's worth old widows and or excuse me, old, divorcees are worth nothing. But beyond that. One of the stipulations in there is how often they have to have sex, how often the husband must provide sex to his wife, not the other way around. And it listed how frequent so a day trader was like, once a week at a minimum, right, but a merchant, every three to say they had a donkey driver that was once a month and then a camel driver was once every three months because they recognize that if your camel driver, you're you're gone for a very long time, so don't punish them. And then they had like, and then because these are scholars writing this and I don't know what their problem was, they just want to have sex with each other instead of their wives. They said, Oh, like every seven years. Is all your seven years. Yeah, like it was ridiculous, how often or how not often they had To have sex so that they could go to the go to their rabbi's house and study with him for years on end, and then just come back once every few years have sex with the wife and then go again. So yeah, so having, like having sex in the religious concept again, and that very narrow first understanding of sis heterosexual marriages, has kind of made sex positive in Judea. Yeah. Yeah. Ian Binns 55:30 So I know because you know, we are approaching the hour. But I do want to at least because, you know, we talked about before recording. And it's a chance for me to get all my giggles out around this idea of hysteria. Your giggles out most of my giggles. But this was something that I do remember hearing about, you know, at one point about female hysteria. And there's different articles that I have found that talk about, you know, because even there were films about it, or there was a film about it, and play. And so the idea was that, and thankfully, I'm gonna keep fumbling this. But Rachel introduced us to a really cool person, I want to do a shout out for sigh babe on Facebook. does some really interesting stuff. I'm really excited about Reading more about her. But what's interesting is that the argument is, is that hold on, let me pull my thing up, and just be easier. It was believed or this is the argument that in the Victorian era, doctors treated women diagnosed with hysteria, which is no longer a diagnosis, by the way, by genital stimulation to induce an orgasm. This hysteria was supposed to be a buildup of fluid in the woman's womb. And doctors assumed that since men and Jackie lated, and felt better that it stood to reason this would work for when women. Apparently, you know, there was multiple, you know, ideas of what was it that the different symptoms that people would have, obviously, if they were experiencing hysteria, and so this was the way to go was this manual massage. But a text came out in 1999. From and I believe that toss are doing more research for this this episode. A historian wrote this book that came out in 1989. And in that she argued that this was the reason why the vibrator was invented, was to make it so that it was easier for the doctors having to treat women for hysteria. I'm just saying that Oh, nice. But you know. So, yeah, and found out that that actually is not accurate. A more recent paper from last couple years has come out showing that this is actually inaccurate, that there is no evidence whatsoever suggests that women are treated for hysteria, by doctors bringing them to orgasm in their offices. So, or that this was the reason why vibrators were invented. But again, a medical treatment. That was something that took off based on one historians perspective, and or book, and then others kind of pushed back on it was fascinating. And we can share these in show notes or something. But in Reading about this particular ailment, and this suppose a treatment Amad. Yes. And suppose the treatment, there was interesting to read about how this particular historian of technology kind of has backpedal a little bit. And so well, no, I didn't mean I meant it more as a hypothesis, not a yes, this is the way it was. But then, you know, when you actually look at the writing shows, that's not actually how it was presented in the text itself. But it still took off, right? Because it was, I mean, when you think about it, this sounds kind of funny. And so it took off, people listen to it and Rachael Jackson 59:13 right, because also, you know, God forbid, somebody creates something for women's pleasure, simply for women's pleasure, Ian Binns 59:21 right? And that's actually there's no reason at the very beginning. It's a disturbing insight, implying that vibrators succeeded not because they advance you know, pleasure, but because they saved labor for male physicians. Rachael Jackson 59:35 Right? So again, yeah, simply for women that has nothing to do with the man right gets co opted into a story of oh, those poor men, just poor, poor doctors, or in a really awful way of the abuse, the potential abuse of Doc Just taking advantage of their women patience, and showing that it's okay. None of this is ever okay. Ian Binns 1:00:11 But even there, I mean, you can easily go online and find 1:00:17 trying to find their, you know, articles Ian Binns 1:00:18 to support that this will that it was used for this as as recent 2019. Right. Yeah. Rachael Jackson 1:00:28 So no, no your sources correct. And use some good thinking. And if you're going to Google things, feel free to use private browsing. Yes. Zack Jackson 1:00:39 And if your interest the scientific method, you know, and you're feeling a little hysterical, just want to try it out. See if it works for you. That's in your hypothesis. Thank you. Science is just messing around and taking notes right so. 1:01:04 Wash your hands first. Ian Binns 1:01:05 And after. Okay, that's all I got. Zack Jackson 1:01:13 Thank you, doctor. Doctor, doctor.
Episode 104 Today we welcome the Rev Dr David Wilkinson all the way from Durham, England. Dr Wilkinson is an ordained Methodist minister with PhDs in Systematic Theology and Theoretical Astrophysics. In addition to working for St John's College, he is the project director of “Equipping Christian Leadership in an Age of Science” which seeks to do exactly what the name implies. We talk about their surprising research into Christian leaders' attitudes towards science, how to think about biblical miracles, how to have constructive dialogue, and what happens when you put bishops in a room full of humanoid robots. This is an engaging, heartfelt, and inspiring conversation, and we're excited to bring it to you. ECLAS - https://www.eclasproject.org/ Reid, Lydia and Wilkinson, David. (2021.) ‘Building Enthusiasm and Overcoming Fear: Engaging with Christian Leaders in an Age of Science', Zygon 56 (4). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/toc/14679744/2021/56/4 Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Check out Zack and Nichole's new podcast "Reimagining Faith with the Pastors Jackson" here... https://www.patreon.com/reimaginingfaith https://reimaginingfaith.podbean.com/ Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:00 Hey there, Zack here. Before we get to today's episode, which is so good, by the way, I wanted to let you know that my wife, Nicole, and I just launched a new podcast called reimagining faith with the pastor's Jackson. I haven't really shared a whole lot about this on the podcast yet. But we both just quit our church jobs, and are in the process of planting a new faith community called Open Table United Church of Christ. At this new faith community were committed to being theologically progressive, locally minded with Jesus at the center. We're starting from scratch. And we are rethinking every part about what it means to be a community of faith in this particular moment in history. We are really excited about the ways that the Spirit is moving among our little team. And we wanted a way to share that with you all as well. Hence, the reimagining faith podcast, we'll be posting new episodes every week, delving into our particular convictions, telling stories, interviewing difference makers and giving you an inside peek into the messy and ridiculous process of planting a church that is not quite a church, but it's also kind of a church, but not really, you know, it'll probably make a lot more sense after you hear a few episodes of it. So why don't you just go ahead and subscribe. Just search for reimagining faith with the pastor's Jackson wherever it is that you get your podcasts. And if you want to help us expand to this work, you can support us at patreon.com/reimagining faith. And now, on to the podcast. You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. Our guest today is the current principal of St. John's College Durham and a professor in the Department of theology and religion. He has PhDs in both theoretical astrophysics and systematic theology, having served as both a Methodist minister and an academic professor. He's also the project director of equipping Christian leadership in an age of science, which is a project whose goals are near and dear to my heart. And I'm sure many of yours as well. It is my privilege to introduce the Reverend David Wilkinson. Welcome to the podcast. Thank David Wilkinson 02:19 you, Zack, it's so lovely to be here. Lovely to talk to you. Zack Jackson 02:24 Yes, I'm so glad that we were able to coordinate across the ocean, get our time zones correct and, and that you're able to be with us today I am fascinated by just the breadth of the work that you have done and that you are doing with the organizations that you're associated with. And so, again, it's an honor to have you here with us. So I mentioned in that that introduction, equipping Christian leadership in an age of science, or EC L A s do you do pronounce the acronym when when you're in a company, David Wilkinson 03:01 about team pronounces it in class, and part of our team pronounces it at class. And we haven't come to agreement on what the correct pronunciation is. So I'm happy with the project. Zack Jackson 03:15 Did any of you consider switching the acronym the words around so it would spell something like Eclair or something that well, David Wilkinson 03:22 as you can see, remember and see from me, I'm very open to a close and as many as possible, probably too many for me. But, I mean, you know, sometimes theology and science is dominated by some of these acronyms. I think what we've been concerned about has been that sense of equipping Christian leadership. And about almost 10 years ago, my friend and colleague Tom McLeish, who's a theoretical physicist and a lay theologian, and I were speculating about what happened when senior Christian leaders, such as bishops, or leaders of other denominations, or leaders of parachurch organizations, those organizations that span different churches, were asked about science. And one of the things that we noticed was that senior church leaders often responded with fear, or negativity, or silence. And the problem with that is that then those who serve as Christian leaders under them, if they come from a scientific background, if your senior leader responds with fear or negativity or silence, then that doesn't really affirm what you're bringing to ministry, in terms of your interest or passion about science. And then that ripples down into congregations, where disciples who live out their lives with a vocation to be scientists, technologists are in Engineers, they're not affirmed in their vocation. And of course, that then ripples out to reinforce this very dominant model of relationship between science and religion, that conflict model of science and religion or independence, that the two have to be separated. And so we thought, Is there a project to be done where we can equip Christian leaders to engage with science with joy, with humility, with confidence with excitement? And that would have a ripple down effect throughout the church? Zack Jackson 05:36 Yes, I mentioned I resonate with this. This is the this is the project that I'm working on for my doctrine ministry program right now, creating resources for pastors to engage, to equip them to have these conversations because it is just so important. So in what ways have since you started this program? How have you been able to start equipping leaders, David Wilkinson 06:00 one of the things we first realized sack was the importance of personal relationships and conversations. And so we started with, with conferences, where we would invite a small group of senior leaders, intentionally inviting them to come here to Durham. And we would take them into science departments, where we introduce them to world class scientists. Now, sometimes, in this work, organizations will choose a scientist who happens to be a Christian. We didn't do that. We just went for world class scientists, whatever their religious backgrounds, and we threw the bishops into their labs. And we got these people to talk about their own science and their work. And it was just terrific from cosmology and simulating universes through to biology, genetics, we even had one wonderful incident where we took 30 bishops into one of our engineering labs here in Durham, where we have small robots, six of them, artificial intelligent robots, humanoid robots, and the bishops were kind of pressed against the wall. Worried about this, these little robots who are wandering round, and the robots went up to the bishops, and started to talk to them. And suddenly the bishops move towards the center of the room, as they started conversing with these robots. And I wish I'd had a video camera to show you. And in a sense, we start with with bishops who are a little worried about science. And slowly they move into the center. And part of that is talking to research students, and talking with professors, and actually seeing that these folk work in science, because they're passionate about finding out about the universe, or they're passionate about helping society and other people, that some of the the big, bad images of science are not quite true when you meet scientists themselves. And we brought into that conversation, then theologians into the conference, to help decode some of the issues of play within the interplay of science and theology. And so this bringing together of people to talk together, and what we found, was after the sessions, the bishops were thrilled to have encountered science. And the scientists were thrilled to encounter bishops, and other senior church leaders who took science seriously. And many of the scientists without any Christian commitment turned up at the bar later on in the conference, to talk more with the bishops. I think there's something really important about that kind of interaction of people, that learning not just about the science in the abstract, but science in terms of it being done by scientists. And then we thought to ourselves, Well, there's one or two other things that we really need to do about this. So we've had a research strand, where we've interviewed 1000, clergy and a number of bishops and senior church leaders about what they really think about science. That's been an important thing. And we might want to go on to some of those findings in a little bit. We've also followed the US in a program called Science for seminaries and working with church leaders are beginning of their ministries. And then we wanted to provide some model situations where people could see how a local congregation could use the scientists within their congregations to do something fruitful for the kingdom, either for the church or for the community. And we call that scientists in congregations. And that's a program that's been used in lots of different parts of the world. And then the final strand that we've done, which is peculiar to the UK, in the UK, the Church of England is the established church. It has a lot of political and media presence. There are bishops in the House of Lords, for example, scrutinizing legislation. And so we embedded a team member within the church of England's work in that area, to assist on some of the questions such as fracking, or AI, that are going through legislation to help Christian leaders give sensible voices within the public debate. So those are some of the things that we've been really excited by Zach. Zack Jackson 11:07 Oh, wow. Yeah, that that sounds very exciting. I would, I would venture to say that most congregations have at least one professional scientist within it, whether they, they're open about that or not. But I'm curious about the ways that your program has, has used scientists within congregations, how are you using those those gifts of people? David Wilkinson 11:32 I think, I think that's a really crucial question. And so let me give you some for instances of some of the projects that we've supported. So we've supported a project called Take your vicar into the lab, where a number of scientists in the congregation have said to their church leader, why don't you come into our workplace, and we'll tell you about what we do day by day. And again, we're talking about people with vocation, and a very different context to what happens in the church on a Sunday. One group of scientists have worked with a professional theatre group drama group, to write a play on artificial intelligence. And this play will, will tour the country, the 45 minute one act play, then there'll be a coffee break. And then into the venue will come a number of local scientists who work in the area of AI for a question answered on AI and religion and Christianity. Another group we've worked with, has produced some resources for something that we call messy science. Now, in the UK, there's a very strong program called Messy Church, which is a way of doing church, for families with young children. And that involves some crafts, and making things. And what we realized was that actually, there are a number of children who are much happier to blow things up in science experiments, to make craft activities. And so we've we've created a book called Messy science, which is scientific experiments that you can do and as part of Messy Church, or indeed, that you can do for an all the family or all age worship on a Sunday, which involves some of the fun of science. Why, for instance, you can take a beaker full of water, and just put a piece of paper at the bottom of it, turn it over, and the water doesn't fall out most of the time. And so these kinds of things is about using the gifts and the passion and the interests of scientists. And I think you're right, like I think virtually every congregation has scientists or teachers of science or technology or engineering within it. But what we're not good at doing is affirming those gifts. So some of the churches I go to, if a young person says the Lord has called me to seminary or Bible college, the congregation will say hallelujah, they will bring that young person to the front. They will so we're going to pray and lay hands on you. And here's a big envelope with money in it to support your expenses. But if a young person in that same congregation says, I'm going to go and study chemistry, I wonder whether that congregation also brings the young person to the front, lay hands on them and gives them a big envelope to help them with their expenses. And I think that's about out, saying science as a gift from God. And to be a scientist is as much a vocation as it is to be a pastor, or to be a missionary. Zack Jackson 15:11 Wow. That is a that is profound. It's I don't think that any churches out there would affirm a child's choosing to become a scientist the way they would be so proud of our little, our little boy who's grown up to be a pastor, and we'd love to help you out in any way we can. But a scientist is essentially seeking out God in just empirical ways through the creation as opposed to David Wilkinson 15:40 theology, Kepler, the great astronomer, once said that science is thinking God's thoughts after him. And what a wonderful way of looking at the universe and that guy became a Christian at the age of 17, just before going up to university to study physics. And early in my Christian life, I kind of realized that if if I say that Jesus is the Lord, then he is Lord of all, not just what I do on a Sunday, but what I do in terms of my interest in mathematics and astrophysics. And so what does it mean to be disciple within that area, as well as what I do in terms of lifestyle with money and relationships, and all the rest of it. And I think that's an area that the church hasn't been good at, in an area that we can work out and help Christian leaders to see science as gift. And the responsibility that that brings. Zack Jackson 16:42 Yes, I wish that more churches had that kind of had that kind of understanding, you know, that that kind of heart and belief. But according to the research that you all have done. That was there was a paper that was published in zeigen, Journal of religion and science, recently, looking at the disconnect between religious leaders interest in science and their willingness to talk about it publicly. There were some very interesting findings in there, would you care to tell us a little bit about David Wilkinson 17:17 Yes, absolutely. And some things that surprised us. We wanted to serve a clergy first of all, and we surveyed about 1000 of them from all different churches and backgrounds. And one of the most surprising things was how often they find themselves talking about science, or engaging with people about science in their ministry. Now, we didn't expect that to be the case. Although looking back on my own ministry, I was a pastor for a decade, in full time, work leading a church. I remember, it was in Liverpool, just off Penny Lane for those who remember the Beatles. And we used to run a luncheon club, where, on a Wednesday lunchtime, we would gather together some elderly folk and provide them with a fairly basic but nutritious and wholesome lunch. And I remember going to a lady who was very elderly, and left school at the age of 14. And I would normally wander around and say hello to people. And I sat down at her table. And she looked at me and said, Now then David, she said, What's this Stephen Hawking and quantum gravity all about? And what does this mean for God? Now, I think sometimes we underestimate the kinds of questions that people have. And so we found that clergy were often addressing questions about the environment, questions about genetics, questions about what does it mean to be human? These big questions, and yet, often, they felt a little bit of a lack of confidence in engaging with these questions. And I think that partly comes from this conflict model, which is so embedded within Western tradition, which you found in the New Atheists. So for Richard Dawkins and others, you now find in many stand up comedians, who also represent the conflict model. But I think sometimes it's also about those subtle messages from the church that has said, Beware of science. And they've often coupled science with images of the Tower of Babel with trying to replace God or atheism. So I think we found that I think we also found and this is, this is something which really fascinated me. And that is the Sometimes the how why distinction becomes a avoidance mechanism for deeper theological questions. What I mean by that, is that when we talk about science and theology, and I often do this myself, we can talk about science about the how, and theology about the why, when it comes to the origin of the universe, for example, my area of, of work and science and, you know, quantum gravity, and is the how of God doing it. Questions of purpose and meaning or value is why, and that's a useful first order distinction. But we found that many senior church leaders were using it as a way to avoid some of the deeper questions. So if you use the how wide distinction, you can perhaps avoid the question, well, how does God really work in the universe? How does God work in healing in miracles in prayer? How is God involved in the laws of physics or not? Now, those can be quite scary questions to folk. But they're important questions for many people. And then I think we I think the third thing that we found was sometimes this fear of certain ways that science has been used, protect, particularly when it comes to theories of evolution. So although there was an openness to assessing scientific theories, there was a sense of those who have used the post Darwinian controversies to argue against Christianity, and to use some scientific theories and evolution and sociobiology. Sometimes I used to argue that once you have a scientific understanding of something, it's nothing but that. So religion could be seen and the way that it's developed, and its socio biological, biological origin. But then that quick move to say, and that's all it is. That's the mistake. So those are some of the things that came out of the research. Zack Jackson 22:23 So I hear the the one idea that science provides the nuts and bolts the understanding of how things work, and religion then gives it the meaning, right, I've heard the illustration that you can learn all you can about the molecular makeup of a chocolate cake, and you can know all about its compounds, but no part of the science can tell you that it's a birthday cake, I'm sorry, that that that then has to come from the meaning. And then I also hear you mentioning, sort of at the end there about the God of the gaps that God develops as a way of explaining the things that we don't understand and has a way of helping us to sleep at night. Giving us a sense of control over the crops, as it were or the movement of the stars and the future and helping us to be less afraid. And as science then explains all of those things, then God gets smaller and smaller and smaller. And that model is just created in such a way that it eliminates itself. It does. And both of those two ways of understanding God are so prevalent, and they both are so limiting. What how do you how do you navigate this world? How do you hold both your faith and your understanding of science in intention in tandem? David Wilkinson 23:47 Yeah. And the sack you've put your finger on it? I think and it's a question that goes back to an old book written by Jeb Phillips, many years ago, which was a book with the title your God is too small. You see, the problem with with God of the Gaps is, as you rightly said, God is too small. And the God that I see in Jesus is not a God who hides in small gaps of scientific ignorance. This is the Lord of all, who is the one who sustains every physical process within the universe. So for me, God is the Creator and Sustainer of the laws of physics. That's the first thing to say. I think secondly, God is big enough that he can sometimes do unusual things, beyond his normal ways of working. And therefore, both as a scientist and a theologian, I'm open to miracle. I'm open to God doing unusual things because I think God is big enough to to go beyond his normal ways of working and special prayer. Within SOS special events, I think the third thing that really helps me to navigate some of this sack is going back to Jesus time and time again. I remember, as a young research student, I've been on a conference in the middle of the summer in the University of Brighton, and Sussex and England. And we were the only people in the university, a group of 40, astrophysics PhD students. And there was only one pub. And so every evening we'd all end up in the same pub. And I remember sitting down with a with a colleague, very, very bright astrophysicist, who within half an hour, had proved to me that God didn't exist. I mean, he just argued against with all the classic arguments against the existence of God. And I remember wandering back to, to the small bedroom I had, and and thinking, Well, you know, I've only been a Christian two or three years. This guy's convinced me that the intellectual argumentation means that God doesn't exist, what am I going to do? And it was that point that by, by my bed on the bedside table was a Bible. I just opened the Bible, and I read again, the Gospels, and I become a Christian, because I'd seen in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, God Himself walk in the pages of history. And there are many questions that I don't have the answers to, there are many intellectual conundrums about the problem of evil, or about how does God actually work in the world, which I don't have easy, simplistic philosophical answers to. But what I see in Jesus is a God who becomes a human being and lives amongst us, in the space time history, a God who participates in the consequences of suffering and evil, he bears them as well as I do. A God who gives me hope, in terms of bodily resurrection, going beyond our normal accepted patterns of what's possible in the world. And a God who actually has a historical record in Palestine, that you and I can sit down and discuss, we might not come to similar conclusions about it. But the data is there for us to discuss it. And so my understanding of science and theology is never simply what we might call the old, big arguments for the existence of God, the design argument, or the First Cause Argument, if I'm authentically Christian, then I have to bring into the conversation. God who reveals Himself in Jesus. And that's been an important part of, of my journey in trying to navigate some of these difficult questions. Zack Jackson 28:14 As a pastor for the past eight and a half years, I not only get questions, nearly weekly, from, especially from the conference, and these teenagers who are thinking through these things in school, but also the adults I, I feel questions from my colleagues almost constantly, who likewise have people asking these questions, and they do not feel equipped to answer them. And so they, they give them you know, shrug shoulders, and I'm sorry, this is just what I believe I'll try to find resources for you. And one of the things that comes up quite often is miracles, when it seemingly when God breaks the rules, yeah. Because even if somebody who values God and values science, they will often just find naturalistic explanations for things. I mean, famously, Thomas Jefferson cut out all of the references of, of miracles in his Bible, and it was much smaller at that point. You know, for example, that if we believe that Jesus in the wedding in Cana and the book of John turned water into wine, using natural processes, I mean, just the fusion of atoms would have created so much energy, it would have leveled all of the Middle East, you know, in a nuclear explosion, and clearly that did not happen. So, either there was a sort of social miracle in which Jesus inspired people to run out to the liquor store, or there is something else happening something super natural. You've done a little bit of work into into miracles and what happens in prayer and things like that. Do you have any insights that you could offer to As clergy out there, David Wilkinson 30:01 well, I have some insights, whether they're useful or not is another question. Zack Jackson 30:07 Oh, the story of my life, I'll put that on my tombstone. David Wilkinson 30:11 I think the first thing to say is that I want to take the gospel writers seriously. And I think sometimes Western scholarship has been rather patronizing to the writers of the Gospel by saying that they simply have rewritten the stories of social miracles, in terms of supernatural miracles, you know, and so, even more extreme would be those who've written that Jesus walking on the waters was actually because he was on a sand bank at the time. Well, I mean, you know, fishermen would know where the sand banks would be, and things of that sort, I think, the Gospel writers are being authentic in terms of what they believed, and I want to take that seriously. And then secondly, there is a granularity about some of the gospel reports, which suggests to me that they aren't simply made up to express theological truth about Jesus. So for instance, you mentioned the wedding at Cana, one of the one of the extraordinary things about that miracle is that Jesus turned between 120 gallons, 280 gallons of water into wine. Now, that that's, that's not the kind of usual detail that you would expect, in terms of if you'd simply wanted a miracle of water into wine, there's something really quite extraordinary about that unexpected about it. And I think there are a number of the miracle stories which just have that ring of truth about them. Now, that's the biblical scholarship at one level, which I think is important for us to do. I think then, as a scientist, I want to come with a number of convictions. The first is that 20th century physics tells us that the universe is far more subtle, and subtle than we ever imagined it to be. We live with the legacy of Isaac Newton's clockwork universe, where the universe is picture herbal, and predictable. And so the transformation of God has rules which he can't break, is based on that clockwork universe. But in the 20th century, as you well know, quantum theory, and then chaotic or complex systems, like the weather, we discovered that actually, the universe is not as picture trouble or as predictable as that clockwork universe was. Now, I don't want to push that too far to say, well, this is where God works in quantum systems. But I do want to take seriously as John Polkinghorne used to say, these things remind us of the danger of the tyranny of model of common sense. Our everyday experience and common sense isn't a good guide to the way the universe actually is, or indeed how God might work in the universe. And then I think coming back to that sense of the God who created the laws, has agency to work in through and beyond the laws is a very important theological question. And that maintaining of some limited agency, for God to work means that, that I'm open to God work in unusual ways. Now, all of that is not to say that I don't think there's an interesting question, as a scientist about where the energy comes from. I want to ask that question. And as a scientist, I want to say, when people claim evidence for healing, or evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, what is that evidence? And let's have an honest and serious conversation about it. I think that's important. But I don't think that all of those things need to be talked about in the round. I don't think that one of these things rules out the possibility of miracles. And so I know that's a very long answer to a very succinct question. But I think sometimes we get ourselves fascinated with wanting to give one line answers to actually very difficult questions. And one of the real problems of miracle for me, is actually not besides The real problem of miracle for me is, if God can work by miracle, why can't he do it more often? And in more serious ways, you know, so the Christian who says, I drove to the supermarket, and it was raining, and there was no parking spaces. But I prayed to the Lord, and suddenly a parking space was there for me. Now, apparently, I want to say to that Christian sister or brother, well, wonderful. But, Lord, why provide a parking space when actually, you know for that particular sister or brother, they could have done with a little extra walk, compared to what's happening with COVID? Or what's happening in Ukraine? And that's the problem of evil. And sec, I don't have any real answer to that. That's one of the big questions that I have. For when I see the Lord face to face. But I'm not prepared to reject the biblical evidence or the scientific openness. Because I can't fully understand the problem of evil, but I want to take it seriously. Zack Jackson 36:16 That is a fantastic point. I think our anyone out there who's a religious leader has probably heard that second argument far more, you know, you hear stories of healing, and then I prayed for my mother to be healed and she wasn't healed. And then, then you have, you know, is the problem, my fate? Did I not pray properly? Did does, am I not favored by God? David Wilkinson 36:41 And that's profound, profound, isn't it and that, and what that means, and that's where, for me, the what I sometimes call the messiness of the Bible, is really important. Because, you know, we have instances within the Bible itself, when Paul, for example, prays three times, about this thorn in the flesh that he has, and he's not healed. When, when we have this unusual incident of when Jesus is called by Mary and Martha, that his friend Lazarus is sick. And Jesus didn't immediately go and heal Lazarus. There's indications in Mark's gospel of times when the whole town or village were brought for healing. And Mark says, many of them were healed, not all of them. Now, that for me actually embeds this problem, not just in our experience, but there is a mystery going on within scripture itself. And, and the thing with Scripture is, it doesn't always give us the answer. I mean, I would love it. If Paul had provided not yet another letter, but a chapter entitled frequently asked questions. been brilliant. The apostle Paul had had a chapter on frequently answered questions, asked questions. And, and one of them would be the problem of evil. But of course, Scripture works often in narratives, in telling of testimony of story. And it's not the place where we get easy answers and philosophical theology. But it's important that our philosophical theology takes those stories seriously. Zack Jackson 38:42 I can't imagine Paul trying to succinctly answer any question. Yes, let's say this is the man who spoke for so long that a boy fell asleep and fell out a window. Which, by the way, you know, he was able to raise this child back from the dead, but couldn't cure his own problem. preacher once told me that Lazarus still died. Yes. And that that sticks with me anytime I think about miracles. So aside from that, aside from the miracles, what do you think it's important that religious leaders should understand and, and in terms of science, and how can they possibly keep up with all of the new research not being scientists themselves? David Wilkinson 39:34 I think both of those questions are really important. So let me take the second one. First, I'll come back to the first one. I don't think this is about equipping Christian leaders in terms of knowledge of science. I think this is about changing attitudes. So that as new science comes about, new discoveries are made new questions arise. Most religious leaders can encounter it, not with fear. But with a sense of, first of all, that this doesn't undermine faith. And second, that they already have resources within their own congregations that can help them. And we've talked already about the role and the vocation of those who are lay Christians and scientists. This is a terrific resource that God has given to every church leader from, you know, teenagers who are fascinated with the questions of science through to those who are at cutting edge research level. And so part of I think the change in attitudes, is that the church leader begins to see that ministry in this area is not just about them. But it's about the body of Christ together, relating to some of these questions. But in order to access that the initial response to science has to be changed away from fear into a humble listening to what's going on. Now, I think, to come back to the to the first question, I think, then there are some big questions for the next decade. And I think one of the biggest questions, which you and I have talked about before, is the question of what it means to be human. You know, I think we've gone through some of the interest and some of the big questions about origins, Big Bang, evolution, those types of questions, Christians still have different views on them. And we'll still keep continuing talking about them. But the central question of what it means to be human, I think is going to be highlighted in lots of different ways. For example, will artificial intelligence become conscious at some stage? If we discover extraterrestrial intelligence? What does that mean for human beings? The mind brain relationship, as we know more about what the relationship between mind and brain is all about? What does that mean, to be human? And, you know, even the Human Genome Project, that if I share 67% of my genes with cauliflower, which you can probably tell by looking at me, then, where's the distinction and being human? Now, I think, in lots of different ways in medical science through to what the James Webb Telescope is going to produce. That question of what it means to be human, is a central question for culture, for society, and for theology. Now, I think the great thing about the Christian faith for me, is that actually the question what it means to be human is a central theological question. It's been explored by generations of theologians down the ages. And one of the fascinating things for me is that it's not defined in the Christian tradition, by what I'm made of. It's defined by who I'm related to. So for me, the question of what it means to be human is a gift from God, a gift of intimate relationship, a gift of responsibility, a gift of creativity. So that to be human is not undermined by better understandings of what I'm physically made of, or that there may be other forms of consciousness out there. But that actually, what defines me as unique as a human being, is that God loves me. And God wants to be in relationship with me. And that may not be exclusive. In her there may be other intelligent beings elsewhere in the universe, who knows. But I don't think that's a threat to that central understanding of what it means to be human, or the kind of the shorthand that we use as theologians been made in the image of God. Zack Jackson 44:34 That's beautiful. I, I'm so fascinated by the relationality of the cosmos, that we identify ourselves as a human by our relationship to each other, but we see it down to the fundamental level that 91% of the mass of the nucleus of an atom comes not from the proton and the neutron but from the forces that are generated by their interaction, and everything down to the fundamental Fields up until the galaxy clusters only exist in relation to one another. And if I mean, obviously, I'm, I'm imposing some of the meaning that from being a relational primate primates into the, into the cosmos, but you almost can't help but see the, the, the brushstrokes of a relational creator, in the fact that everything only exists in relation to each other. I David Wilkinson 45:34 think that's right. Second, I mean, let me let me confess to you and to the listeners, that when I was trained first, as a, as a physicist, I thought that physics was the only true science, that chemistry, chemistry was for people who couldn't do physics, biology was for people who couldn't do chemistry. And I won't tell you what I thought of sociology. Now, now, of course, I have repented of such things. Zack Jackson 46:03 For example, other mathematicians out there, for exactly David Wilkinson 46:07 the reason that you've said that when atoms get together in relationship to four molecules, then a new series and levels of reality occurs, which is called chemistry. When those molecules get together and form living beings, a new level of biology emerges. And when human beings get together, a new level, which can only be studied by sociology emerges. And that's that emergent relationality, which you've talked about. And that reminds me as a physicist, that the universe cannot be simply reduced to its constituent parts, you have got to understand its constituent parts, but you can only understand them fully, when you understand the relationality between them, which is exactly the point that you beautifully made. Zack Jackson 47:05 Well, thank you, thank you for the relational work that you're doing. And for that, being at the heart of your mission, understanding that it's not enough to just simply give information to clergy and to scientists, but to build relationships of understanding and mutuality. And that's, that is certainly how we interact. So for all the work that you're doing, through the foundation, through your your writings, and through, you know, the work you do at the college, thank you for for your life's work you're doing, you're doing really important work. And as we kind of ended our time together. Is there anything else that you would like our listeners to know, to take away from this conversation? I've David Wilkinson 47:50 I've enjoyed the conversation immensely. Of course, I think it's important to say one of the fascinating things for me, as always, anything that one is able to achieve as an individual is only as strong as the team that you work with. And one of the great things about the work that we've been doing here in the UK is a combination of collaborations and partnerships between different universities and the Church of England. And the quality of the colleagues that that I work with, who involve scientists, theologians, sociologists, historians. And that's a very important part of understanding science. Science doesn't exist in a pure scientific vacuum. It comes with history that comes with philosophy. Indeed, it's framed for me by theology. And so as we work together, across different disciplines, so our understanding of these things becomes much, much richer. And the problem of divorcing the church from science is partly the way that our culture has divorced arts and humanities, from science. And I think particularly in the UK, that's been the case. And so part of this is a bigger cultural issue, which is valuing all types of human knowledge and how we interact together and learn more as community together. But thank you, Zack, I've really enjoyed this. It's a delight. What a wonderful podcast you doing. And thanks for for the time this afternoon. Zack Jackson 49:35 Absolutely, and if any of our listeners out there are interested in learning more, they can go to E c l a s project.org. There's will be a link in the description if you'd like to learn more about what the equipping Christian leadership in an age of science is doing. There's plenty of videos from your previous conference, there's articles, there are links of places to get involved and to learn more and to help help equip you to do this very important work out in the world. You can also listen to any one of the 100 or so episodes of the podcast previously. We've where we've talked about a lot of these issues more in depth. So, again, thank you, David, for being here. And I wish all the best in all of your future endeavors. David Wilkinson 50:20 Thank you very much.
Episode 103 We are so excited to welcome Dr James Stump to the podcast today. Jim is the Vice President of Programs at BioLogos and hosts the podcast, Language of God. He is a passionate speaker, author, and organizer in the field of science and religion. He has written multiple books on science and religion, and has the uncanny ability to bring disparate groups together for meaningful and respectful conversation. We sat down for an hour to talk about the work that BioLogos does, what he's most excited about, and how to have productive conversations with people who disagree with each other. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:04 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. Our guest today is the vice president of programs at BioLogos. And host of the podcast the language of God is a passionate speaker, author and organizer in the field of science and religion. He's also the author of four views of creation, evolution and intelligent design, science and Christianity in Introduction to the issues, how I changed my mind about evolution, and the Blackwell companion to science and Christianity. We are so excited to welcome Jim stump to the podcast today. Welcome. Jim Stump 00:42 Thanks, Zack. Good to be here. Thank you, Ian. Zack Jackson 00:44 Yeah. And thank you so much for taking this time out of your day. I know that there's so much going on right now with BioLogos. We were just talking before the podcast started about the conference that you have just a couple of days, which, unfortunately, by the time that this podcast airs will be over. So Jim Stump 01:02 there will be virtual recordings available to see if you're interested in that sort of thing. Yeah. Zack Jackson 01:08 Oh, excellent. That was gonna be my first question. So for the folks who did not register, because they are just hearing about it after the fact, they can go watch Jim Stump 01:17 those. So I think the way it works is you can register for the online portion. And it's a pay what you can kind of thing, and those are going to be available for three months after after the conference. And then there may be free versions that that come out. Don't hold me to that. I'm not entirely sure about that. But I think that's the way it works. Zack Jackson 01:40 Excellent, wonderful. So you heard it here. First, folks. Actually, you probably already here last point. So for those of our listeners who are not all that familiar with BioLogos, could you take a minute here and explain a little bit about what it is that you that you all Jim Stump 01:57 sure the BioLogos elevator speech. We are a nonprofit organization, founded by Francis Collins, who was the leader of the Human Genome Project, and then became the director of the NIH is currently the President's science advisor. He wrote a book in 2006, called the language of God after which our podcast was named. And in it, he shared about how he is this world class scientist, he didn't call himself a world class scientist. He's too humble for that. But he is a world class scientist, and how he came to understand these scientific things about the world, but then also how as an adult, he came to faith in Christ, and tried to show how those two things fit together in his own life. And after the publication of that book, he got lots and lots of questions, emails, even letters at the time, from people asking follow up questions. And he quickly got overwhelmed with all of that and put together a group of people to write out answers to frequently asked questions and they put it on a podcast or sorry, they this is a podcast, they put it on a website and call it BioLogos. And that's how biologists got started, it was answers to frequently asked questions about primarily science and evolution at the time, just after that podcast, after that website went live was when he was tapped by President Obama to become the director of the NIH and had to separate himself from bio logo. So it became a little more organized and incorporated and started having things like conferences and doing a blog and writing some other books and those kinds of things. And so here we are, 12 years later, or so that we're now a staff of 1414 people. We have a speaker's bureau, we have this podcast, you mentioned the website is still kind of the main hub of what we do. We had over 2 million unique visitors to the website last year, lots of them interesting, interestingly enough, still landing on these pages of frequently asked questions that Milo has gotten started with. So somebody does a Google search on something related to human beings and Adam and Eve and evolution or these days, we also talked about climate change and vaccines and those kinds of topics as well. And I think it's fair to say we've become a pretty trusted organization within the Christian community for people who are trying to take their faith seriously, but also want to take the findings of contemporary science seriously. Ian Binns 04:35 Yeah, yeah. So Zack Jackson 04:36 you've been with them since 2013. Or so I Jim Stump 04:39 started in 2013. Half time I was a philosophy professor and split my time between BioLogos and the college I was teaching at for a couple of years and then went full time starting in 2015. Zack Jackson 04:55 But what about your trajectory of your life led you to that point to the place. Jim Stump 05:00 So I did a PhD in philosophy and was always interested in science. My undergrad degree was in science education II and I would have had you as a professor somewhere along the, along the route. And my father was was trained originally as like a middle school science teacher, he eventually became, became an administrator. But I, and we grew up in a Christian family, a very conservative Midwest Christian community. And so I was always interested in these two things and was never really forced into the kinds of positions you hear lots of people from conservative Christian families were creation science or young earth creationism or something we I was never forced into those kinds of positions, and was always encouraged to investigate and ask questions and look at the natural world as a good place, and was always interested how that fit with the Christian commitments that I had. And so I did this undergrad degree in math and science education, thought I might become a high school or middle school math and science teacher. And then immediately after college, my wife and I went to Africa actually to teach in a mission school for a while. And there I started Reading, Reading books more seriously than I did as a math major and in college. And so it was primarily the 19th century fiction shelf in the library in this little school way out in the middle of, of the jungle, actually. And somewhere in that conjunction between the math and science analytical training I had and then Reading 19th century fiction like Tolstoy and Dostoevsky and Melville and some of these great ideas that came out somewhere in the conjunction of those two things out pop philosophy, and I'm not the first person I've heard to say that, that they were attracted to philosophy through literature, but came back from there and went to grad school and philosophy, wanted to do something related to science and religion in a philosophy PhD, but was said no, you can't really do that in this department. But you could do science and, and metaphysics science and philosophy more generally. So I did a I did a dissertation that was kind of historical in nature, the scientific revolution, how the advancing scientific theories interacted with, with the advancing philosophical theories of the time, and how these two disciplines interacted with each other, all with an eye toward how does this affect science and religion. And so then started teaching in a small Christian liberal arts school where you teach about everything and don't have too much time to research yourself. But I got a fellowship one year through the Templeton Foundation to go to Oxford, for to do some projects in science and religion. And that was where I was introduced more specifically to the academic discipline of science and religion and really liked it, and started doing some things there. In 2013, BioLogos had a new president who was from Grand Rapids, Michigan, the BioLogos offices were previously in San Diego, the the past president was a professor at Point Loma Nazarene University in San Diego. But when Deb haarsma became president, she said, I'm in need to move the headquarters to where I live in Grand Rapids, Michigan, and only two of the staff wanted to move from San Diego to Grand Rapids, Michigan. Surprise, surprise. And so she put out a call looking for some new staff. And in particularly, she wanted somebody in philosophy and theology that could help to curate some of the resources for the website, and so on. So I responded to that saying, I am really interested in this and the work BioLogos is doing. And I think I could help in, in what you need, but I'm not ready to quit my full time, full professor tenured position to do that, can we work out some other deal? And to my surprise, she said, Yeah, let's do this. So for two years, by oligos, bought out part of my faculty contracts so that I could do each of them half time. And that was with the full, full permission of the administration from this little college where I was teaching and but then as word started getting out to some of the broader constituents in that community, it made them nervous that there was a faculty member, so closely aligned with BioLogos that accepts evolution, you know, so sort of long. We called it a dialogue started, but it was more of a one way monologue, I'm afraid and ended with some of the documents that faculty have to sign every year being changed. And it kind of forced me to say, I probably don't belong here anymore, and biogas wanted to hire me full time. So in 2015, I started working for them full time. That was a very long answer to your question of how I got here, but that's the know the nitty gritty like taste a lot of her. Zack Jackson 09:57 I feel like a lot of our listeners can resonate With that, there's a lot of folks, especially those of us, who come from a more conservative background and more evangelical background, who we dip our toes into this world, we realize we're not alone in the people who really want to engage with science with integrity, and maintain our spirituality. And we discover this new and beautiful and exciting world that God has made. And there's a new life in us. And then we're met with a brick wall of opposition from the people who used to accept us where our identity used to be. And they've now changed, that'd be the fact that they changed their covenant that you could no longer sign in. Very similar thing happened to me in a church once, but is one of the things that I really appreciate about BioLogos of all of this sort of organizations that that are tackling these issues. You all seem to have the best inroads into the evangelical world, where there is, you know, historically, anyway, a lot of science denialism. What is it about about your organization that, that gives you this ability to speak, to speak science speak truth into a world. So full of denialism? Jim Stump 11:17 That's kind of you to say that, and I wonder if one day somebody in the sociology department might write a write a big dissertation and do a big study related to science and religion organizations in the US because it's, it's a fascinating territory. BioLogos in its earlier days, so soon, after Francis Collins had to disassociate himself with the organization, there was one group of people that came in, and you can go, you can still find some of the the early articles that were written, more so you find when I travel, people who reacted in a certain way that wasn't very positive, I think there's a natural, I think there's a natural kind of progression for people that start to entertain these kinds of ideas. That leads them away. Part of what happens when you when you're trying to figure out how to reconcile evolution with Christian faith, and particularly with the Bible is your interpretation of Scripture, you start to realize has to be a little more nuanced, and, and not quite. So look, I just read this in the Bible, and therefore that's it. And we come to think that that wasn't a good way of interpreting scripture anyway. But what it does is it opens the doors for you to reconsider lots of other things, right, that you see, this is harder, this is messier than, then perhaps the community I came from had led me to believe. And I think there were some instances in those early days of BioLogos, where that was almost pushed down people's throats a little too harshly. And they felt like BioLogos was saying, Oh, you poor benighted evangelicals, let me help straighten you out. And let me you know, show you the truth. And you'll come to be just like we are, then that's that's maybe not a charitable way of interpreting that. But that's the kind of message I hear from people who were only acquainted with BioLogos in some of those early days, and then there was a very intentional decision for a kind of kinder, gentler approach, and the hiring of people that identified themselves as evangelicals, and we're still part of this world. And so I think we took on more of an aura of trying to reform from within rather than taking potshots from the outside, that's a little too simplistic and is perhaps a caricature of what was actually happening. But I think that's, that points to some of it that we have very intentionally tried to keep one foot in the evangelical world, even though you know the way the culture wars have bundled issues together. Science is on one side, and religion is on the other side, way too often. And we find ourselves in that No Man's Land out in the middle. But instead of just going with the flow of saying, well, then we're just going to become this progressive organization that sneers at evangelicals. You know, we've said no, we're, we're still part of this and many of these impulses we share. And so it's much more an issue of how do we articulate within, you know, the the framework that makes sense to that community? So I don't know it's a it's a really good question, and we are not a perfect organization and we misstep and stumble all the time, but It's a it's a one of our one of our values. I mean, our, in our founding documents, our values, say, rigorous science, Christ centered faith and gracious dialogue. So it's not I think too many people use the speak the truth in love verse as a weapon that gives themselves permission to club people over the heads with the truth as they know it now. And we're much more concerned about, you know, winning people through graciousness than just clubbing them with the truth. Ian Binns 15:35 So I'm curious, I'd like that idea. You talk about the having the conversation, right, making it so that you can actually have a conversation? Which I really liked that how do you approach those who? I mean, I'm certain there are individuals or groups maybe who've started off maybe more antagonistic, or they've started off their conversation with you in an attacking type manner? How do you handle that? Or Or do you initially do? Do you know what I mean? More? I'm trying to get out here like it. People who maybe approach more with my way or the highway? I am correct. You were wrong. type of approach. What have you done in the past? Jim Stump 16:20 Yeah. So thankfully, those people are the outliers. Actually. They're the ones that get the most press. They're the loudest voices out there. But it's not the norm. We commissioned a sociological survey origins a few years back, and it was really fascinating to see, yes, you can if you only ask the question, like, How old do you think the earth is? Or do you think human beings evolved? evangelicals? Still, the majority of them, say our, you know, young earth creationists or old earth creationist at least saying that there's no such thing as evolution. But when you dig a little deeper and ask, and how important is this to you? It's a really small percentage, it's like less than 10%, who pound their fist on the lectern and say, I'm a young earth creationist Darnit. And it has to be that way, or you're all going to hell or you know, that you hear those voices on the internet, particularly, but that's not the majority of people. And so there's a, there's a middle ground of people who are, you know, either don't really care that much about the issues, or they say, this is interesting, but it's not hugely important to me, and I'm not going to get into fights over it. So that's the first response to your question in is that it's not as many people doing that, as you might be led to believe, by if you only follow these issues on Twitter, right. But then there are those people and one of the things BioLogos has done is that we don't really do debates. I mean, that became that became part of the DNA, I'm afraid of evangelicalism and apologetics, to say we're gonna get up and, you know, have a debate and trot out all our fancy reasons and show people why, you know, we're really just as smart as you are actually smarter. Because we believe the truth. We've said, we're not doing that. We're happy to have conversations with people, but we vastly prefer those conversations to come out of relationship that has happened. So just as an example of that, reasons to believe is another science and faith organization out in California, founded by Hugh Ross, who is an astrophysicist, became a Christian later in his life and started this as an apologetics ministry. They're old earth creationists. So they accept the science of physics and geology that points toward the ancient age of the Earth in the universe, but they don't accept evolution. And we've had really good, interesting, productive talks with them. But it's only because we've spent a lot of time with them. And when I say spend a lot of time with them, it's not a lot of time on stages, talking in front of other people, or even doing this kind of thing on a podcast where you're having a conversation, but secretly, you're just trying to talk to your own audience, you know, preach to the choir, in some sense, we spent a lot of time with them behind closed doors out of the public eye just getting to know each other. So four or five representatives from our organization would get together with four or five representatives from their organization. And we'd talk about the common ground we have we talk about our differences. We'd also pray with each other and we'd hear each other's spiritual journey and stories and we'd eat a meal together. And so I often have said in response, in reaction to that and to these kinds of questions, that it's a lot harder to be snippy over the internet at people with whom you've prayed. People that you people that you have out with people that you know, their testimony, their stories, in when when you have that kind of a relationship, it's it's way harder to be uncharitable toward them. Where when it's people that you don't know anything about, you read a quote, or two, and you make all these assumptions about who they are and what they must be like, and you just go from there. So developing relationship has always been really important in the BioLogos approach to these things. Ian Binns 20:30 Yeah, I like that, if you're talking about debates, you know, I've never found debates on these types of issues, worthwhile. And when I was faculty at LSU, for three years, from 2008, to 2011. And Louisiana, you know, at times has historically said trouble with teaching of evolution in schools and, and they still do, and I was testifying a lot down there against efforts to undermine the teaching of evolution, and also to undermine curriculum materials. And right before we moved back to North Carolina, I don't remember the name of the person. But someone reached out to me from a small group in Canada, wanting to set up a debate as a way to come after me. And I immediately turned it down. But I reached out to some of my mentors about it. And they just said, it's, it's not worth it. So you're, you're going the right way. But it was it was interesting to finally get on someone's radar that way. But again, I just saying it's not worth my time. So Zack Jackson 21:30 there seems to be a fine line between a debate and a conversation. Right, and you are a podcast host? Do you find yourself in situations where things start turning into a debate over a conversation? And? Jim Stump 21:49 Not very often, not very often. And I'm sure part of that comes through the selection of the people we have on the podcast to talk with. Most of them are people who agree with us to start with we we do consciously try to look over the course of a season or over a calendar year to make sure we're talking with people that are outside the tent, and outside the tent in different directions, whether that's they don't agree with us on science, or they don't agree with us about Christianity. And but those have those who have never, like gotten ugly or nasty or anything, so. Zack Jackson 22:28 Okay. And so for those of you who are listening who are not familiar, Jim is the host of the the language of God podcast, which is saying before, one of the only regularly updating podcasts that tackles science and religion on a regular basis with any kind of intellectual integrity is how I think I would put it, but but I do regular Google searches because, well, you know, one of the reasons we started this podcast was because there wasn't a whole lot out there. And we were in conversation, the five of us and I, we realized there was not a whole lot of content out there. And there wasn't a whole lot of organization of people, everyone kind of felt like they were on their own. And so we wanted to create a community of people who, who at least were asking similar questions, if not on the same page. And you do that on a regular basis. So first of all, thank you for doing that. And I wonder if you might take a little, a little bit of time here and tell us a little bit about what is sort of the driving ethos behind your podcast and what you're trying to do with it? Jim Stump 23:47 Yeah. One of the most frequently requested resources we had it BioLogos, in the middle teen years of the 21st century, was to have a podcast and we always replied with Yeah, that would be great. But we just don't think we have the resources to do it. Both the human resources as well as money we had known and that that answer was fairly, an uneducated, but we didn't, we didn't we just didn't know about podcasting. And I had a chance, depending on your theology, you might say providential conversation with a former student of mine, at a party one night, I asked him what he was doing. And he said, I started this new business, and I'm a consultant for podcasters. And I'm like, seriously, there is such that you can do that. And he said, Yeah, lots of people want and I said, What does it take to do a podcast? And we had this conversation for about an hour and at the end of that hour, I had the whole plan in mind to go back to the leadership at BioLogos and say, we need to do this. We can do this. It's not as complicated as I thought. It's doesn't take as much money as I thought. and using somebody like this, we can figure out how to do it well BioLogos we're, we're funded entirely through grants and donations, we don't sell anything. So our only revenue comes from those. And so anytime we have a new project, we ended up pitching it as a grant proposal, or we find a donor who's interested in that way, we really thought we needed to hire one more person than we then we had to be able to devote time to doing it. And so we ended up getting, we ended up getting a grant to start it to start it off. And to do that, you have to write up this big document saying this is what we want to do. And essentially, it was taking the academic conversations of science and religion that you guys know that that go on at all sorts of levels. But it doesn't often trickle down into the people in the pew. So this was a grant that was intentionally pitched to say, we want to bring the kinds of conversations that the scholars in our network are having regularly and to try to translate that for a general podcasting audience. For people that say, Yeah, I'm kind of interested in where humans came from. I'm interested in what the Bible has to say about this. And I'm interested in the latest scientific discoveries, but to take that and package it in a way that would that would be interesting for, for for those kinds of people. So it's designed very much to take the all the topics that BioLogos is is interested in and engaged in and to find the interesting people to talk to about that. My only qualifications as a podcasting host. Before starting this were that I was I was the announcer for the women's basketball team at the college where I was teaching for a number of years. And so I had practice speaking into a microphone in that regard. But I was something I thought I can I'd really like to do this, I think I can do this. And there was some skepticism going into it, whether this was really the right fit for me to be the podcast I was about, we started doing a few and people said, Yeah, I guess you can do that, that I guess, announcing three pointers translates Okay, and talking about science and faith, so, so now it's, it's like half of my job. It's and it's been one of the most enjoyable things that I've done. I really enjoyed having these kinds of conversations with with lots of people. So we just like you have recently hit the 100 episode mark, and have continued, continued on for we'll go for at least another couple of years. And we'll see what happens then. Zack Jackson 27:42 Yeah, I only just realized that you all launched your podcast just about just a couple of months before we launched our podcast. Yeah, it was we must have lost at the same Jim Stump 27:52 time, we must have sent the same need out there. Zack Jackson 27:56 I think we probably did, it sounds like we sent the same need anyway, the the taking the from the the academy and bringing it back down to the people as it were. So in the past 100 and some odd episodes, what what are some of the things that you've learned that stand out to you? Jim Stump 28:17 So, I mean, I think I've learned how to be a better podcast host than I was at the beginning. I've learned I mean, just through conversations with people, one of the things you see over and over again, is that what people believe is really deeply connected to who they are, where they live, the community that's around them, the ideas that we have aren't just floating around in, you know, some ether, that they're deeply connected to the people that we are to the communities that that we're part of. And that can be troubling to people sometimes if you think that leads you down this road of relativism of some sense, but I think instead it shows the embodied pneus of our faith, it shows that our faith can take on particular particular guises depending on where we are and who we're around. And that shouldn't be threatening, that should be an indication of the incarnational element of Christianity. Right. And so it's it always gives me I think, great hope to hear people different people's expression and articulation of their Christian faith dependent on the circumstances that they've found themselves in. And there are obviously commonalities through that. And different challenges. It's similar challenges that come out and are expressed in in similar ways but it it doesn't take away from the kind of uniqueness and embeddedness of of the faith in our in our lives as we find them. Use if Ian Binns 29:59 Zach knows this. We've been friends for a long time night, I always bounce back and forth. And you were talking earlier. Jim, when you're talking about your journey, and you refer to a fellowship that you did, I think you said it was with Oxford maybe or something. Can you delve more into that a little bit? And what was that experience? Like? So what was it then? What was that experience for you? Jim Stump 30:19 The John Templeton Foundation is the major funder of all things science and religion in, in this country and in several other countries. And they started a program designed for primarily for faculty at Christian colleges to get more engaged in the academic discipline of science and religion. And so this was, it was actually three summers in a row held at Oxford University. Wickliffe Hall is one of the colleges, one of the halls of, of Oxford University. So three summers in a row, I went over there for four weeks, each two of those summers, I even got to bring my family with me. And it was really transformative time. For me as a scholar and understanding deeper the the issues involved in science and religion. So we each had to pitch a project of some sort to work on throughout those times. And then there was a cohort of about 35 people who were there, and we got to know each other and became friends, and had these kinds of conversations a lot. And so I came back and started working and writing more seriously in the academic field of, of science and religion. And that's kind of what led me to BioLogos then, too, so yeah, and they've done so Templeton has done this several times with different cohorts. I was I was part of the second cohort. So it was see if I have my dates, right. 2003, four and five. Were the years that the summers that I was there, there was a three year program immediately before that, too. And since then, I think they've been doing just two year cohorts, but have had similar programs for quite a while. Yeah. Ian Binns 32:01 That's because just for me, personally, that's something I'm interested in. And obviously I work at a secular institution, but of the fellowship that brought all of us together. Sinai's snaps as it was, was something that, you know, obviously was very powerful for me personally. And it led to the five of us becoming very good friends in this podcast. But it's something that I am more interested in trying to find other avenues just because, you know, as Zack mentioned, of the five of us, I'm the only one that's not as engaged, I guess you could say, within the religious community, as the others just because of my work. And as a science educator, which is not a bad thing. It's just something that I crave. So Jim Stump 32:47 I think, when we have so when BioLogos has these conferences, like the one you mentioned, that's, that's coming up here this week, that's, that's what we hear most from the people who come and attend that they've been just craving fellowship around like minded people. Because for too many for too many people in their, in their religious communities, they find it challenging and difficult to talk openly about science. And for many scientists, then in their work situations, they find it difficult to talk openly about their faith commitments. And so again, we're kind of in that no man's land between those those two ideological camps. And so but there really are a lot of people out there like us that are interested in both of them. So it's, it's very, very nice to have a community of people that are involved in both. Ian Binns 33:38 Well, and thankfully, my my church community, I'm an Episcopalian. And within my Episcopal Church, community, immediate community, at least it is very much welcomed. You know, I've taught several classes from my church, with my former Rector and my current Rector is a huge fan of our podcasts. And he actually was a high school biology teacher before he went to seminary. So it's an area that I get to talk about a lot, but you know, academically, you know, I get to do work on it and write about it. But you know, I do, I'm trying to get to know people in our religious studies program, for example, but also to to get to know people at different institutions around the country and seminaries and things like that as a way just to kind of collaborate more of science and religion centers as a way to collaborate more, because it's something that I find very fascinating, obviously, since we do this. Good. Yeah. Zack Jackson 34:31 So you've, you've done a lot of work on with with BioLogos in the in building resources, right, with answering Frequently Asked Questions for for faith leaders for Christians, across the board. But what is it that within this, this fear this this, this world of science and religion, this relationship between the two that that just gets you jazzed? That That makes you excited that you could talk about for an hour. Jim Stump 35:03 Yeah. So I got into this work primarily, because I'm teaching at this Christian College. And I started hearing more and more former students after I'd been there long enough former students, I'd start hearing that had left their faith, because they got out of the bubble that we were part of, and saw how science works in the real world. Maybe it was just watching the Discovery Channel, seeing nature, and, and somewhere deep inside them, whether it was ever articulated this way explicitly, or not, somewhere deep inside them from the religious communities they had grown up in, we're like, this doesn't fit. This doesn't work this with my faith, this view of the world doesn't, you know, I can't reconcile this. And I'm feeling that I got to choose, am I either going to double down and be part of this religious community? Or am I going to say, Yeah, this is the way the world works, and the what scientists told us, and they would feel at this fork in the road of having to choose between these two. And so I got into this because I was tired of hearing that of hearing people think that somehow they had to choose between science and, and faith. And so I said, I gotta sort some of this out myself. I gotta I mean, I've, as I told you before, I've I've never really tempted by things like young earth creationism, but neither was I ever completely sure how to reconcile, in my own mind, things like what Genesis says, with evolution. And so it was through some of my own Reading through some of the work in this Templeton group that I was talking about in Oxford, where it was like, Okay, now I'm starting to see the way that it's not like you have to compromise somehow, on your faith, it's that I need a little better, more sophisticated under understanding a way of interpreting scripture, that's actually better. It's not somehow, you know, shirking responsibility, but it's like, no, these, these documents didn't fall from heaven, that they were written in a time and place. And so coming to understand that just like, opened my eyes to say, Okay, I'm free. Now, I feel like I'm free to explore the scientific evidence and let that lead me where it will, because it's not going to threaten this commitment to faith that I have to this understanding of the Bible, even as this inspired document that that is, you know, been so important to our, to our tradition. So that in my own journey, led to I think I can show this to other people here now, too, I think, I think we can help people come so that they don't get to a crisis point the way so many of my former students had. And so that part of understanding in one bigger, more coherent picture has been really important for me, and I think, is is one of those things that keeps me juiced up and in talking to other people about this, that, that you can take both of these seriously, right, so that it's not not giving up on one or the other. More recently, so BioLogos, here about three years ago, made an intentional decision to expand the topics we talked about. Earlier on, it was mostly evolution and origins related work. And that was an intentional decision also to try to unbundle it from the other issues, because as we talked about on these culture wars, that too often the culture wars come as prepackaged bundles of of issues and topics and that you have to take all of one or all of the other and BioLogos said, No, we're not trying to get you to we're not trying, we're not talking about climate change. We're not talking about homosexuality, we're not trying to get you to vote democratic. We're just trying to talk about evolution as a way of unbundling that, but after doing that for about 10 years, we said we think we've earned enough credibility and trust that maybe we do need to talk about some other scientific topics. That was a at a strategic planning meeting in 2019. And we thought that 2020 was going to be the year of climate change and creation care for BioLogos. And then COVID happened. And we pivoted really hard in 2020, then to trying to provide scientific resources from a Christian perspective that people might trust related to COVID and really ramped up very quickly in that regard. And so then by about 2021, by the middle of 2021 or so we we started thinking more seriously and developing more resources on climate change. And that's become an issue now for me, that keeps me animated and sometimes keeps me up at night. And seeing that just the psychology of the way this is an issue works, that it's just far enough away that it doesn't feel like a crisis right now. But it really is a crisis right now. I mean, the things we're we have this short window right now as a civilization, to make the right kinds of choices, and to show how this ought to flow out of our faith. You know, rather than again, it being bundled on the opposite side of the culture wars from where many people of faith are. And they think that's what those liberal people are worried about. I'm not worried about that, well, to show that this ought to flow out of our faith, that we ought to be caring for creation, and that we ought to be worried about the justice have we in the in in the Western world, the industrialized world who have caused almost all of this are going to suffer the least from it, it's going to be the people who didn't cause it that are going to suffer the most. And what does our what does our faith commitment have to say about that? Right? Shouldn't? Shouldn't we of all people be most concerned about what the poorest and the least of these around the world are going to suffer as a result of what we've done over the last few generations? Yeah, yeah, Zack Jackson 41:19 I was just Reading that the, you know, the Solomon Islands are probably going to be the first nation that is completely eradicated by the sea level rise, and they're trying to purchase large swaths of land in Asia is or Jim Stump 41:32 relocate a country Zack Jackson 41:34 to create a new country, as theirs is disappearing. We hear our are saying, well, you know, maybe it's 100 years out. I think we're all pretty, pretty aware. If you're listening to this podcast, you are probably fairly aware of the awful parts of climate change and the things that we shouldn't be doing. And there's perhaps, a sort of paralyzing nihilism to it. For those of us who think about this a lot. Is there anything happening in this in this realm that brings you hope, right now? Jim Stump 42:12 Right at the end of 2021, we did a series on hope. And I've been thinking about it a lot lately, because in the in the sense of, is it possible for me to be hopeful, and yet not terribly optimistic? Because when I read the data, when I read the new IPCC report, I'm not very optimistic. And is that something different than hope, and I'm persuaded that I can be hopeful as an intentional choice of commitment, as a way of saying, this is how I'm going to look at the world. I'm committed to seeing it as God's creation as a place where God is sovereign, not in the sense that God controls every detail that happens, but in the sense that the good guys win. In the end, I'm committed to that view of life that, that God will work all things together for good. I'm not very optimistic about the the way things are going. But that ultimately, I'm not. I'm not even called to be effective. We had a podcast guest use this line that I just think is super powerful that we are not called to be effective. We're called to be faithful. And what does it look like to be a faithful Christian in these days? When it doesn't look like we're being very effective at convincing people to do the right thing? What does it mean to be faithful in that, in that kind of circumstance, and I think it's to continue to say that God's on the throne, Jesus is the Lord, within our tradition. These are the phrases we use that order our order our lives, and that we're going to continue to love our neighbor, and love our enemies, and to honor God with our hearts and souls and minds and strength. And hope then becomes the kind of outflow of looking at the world in that way and of being committed to that, to that way of looking at the world, that hopefulness can be and affect an outcome from the commitment to being faithful. And again, I think it's possible to have that attitude while at the same time the sort of emotional risk sponsz to immediate circumstances is not always very good. But that optimism or pessimism I see is that emotional reaction to what I see right now. Whereas Hope is the commitment to what I believe the way things are going to be, ultimately, much longer perspective, eternal perspective that hope derives from as opposed to optimism or pessimism. Zack Jackson 45:28 I think you've just described Isaiah as call from Isaiah chapter six, where God says, you know, Whom shall I send to bring a message to the people and Isaiah says, ooh, pick me. And God says, Here's your message. Tell them to repent, but they're not going to do it. Thanks for that. I know from the outset that this is going to fail, but I need you to do it anyway. Oh, I like that, that a call to faithfulness, not effectiveness. Because there's a we, we just had a section in, I teach confirmation in my in my church, and we've got eight teenagers. And we were talking about Christology and talking about Jesus. And we got to the section on Christ's return. And they have a lot of questions about what it's going to be like, when Jesus comes back. Is it going to be like, when he came the first time? Is he going to be a baby? Is he already here? Is it going to be dramatic in the sky? And the big question was when, and most of them, uh, kind of agreed amongst themselves, without my prodding, that it was probably just going to be when the climate gets too warm, for humans to live anymore. And that we are going to once we destroy the world, that's when Jesus will come in. And so they were just talking amongst themselves about how bad it has to be first, before Jesus will come and set things right. And like the fact that this is the sort of casual conversation happening among 13 year olds, it was like a shot to the heart to me, because, you know, this is something that's deeply important to me as well. But when I was 13, I was certainly not thinking in these terms. Right? When I was 13, my, the limit of my understanding of the environment was that in all those six pack from soda rings, were going to kill turtles. You know, Captain Planet was the extent of my understanding of what we were doing to the world. But for them, they see this as a present reality. And I think the rest of us need to wake up to that. Jim Stump 47:35 This is part of what has urged us at BioLogos. To make this to make this one of the core topics that we deal with the origins issues are interesting, they're important at some level, and have implications for things like how you understand scripture, and so on. But whether there was a historical Adam or Eve is not going to affect too many people's lives and livelihoods and caused countries like the Solomon Islands to have to relocate, right? I mean, there's a different sort of immediacy and importance to the topics of climate change that we've got to get this one, right, or it's not just going to result in splitting of denominations, it's going to result in inability to have a sustainable planet anymore. Ian Binns 48:22 When you think about to, you know, there are still indigenous cultures out there that are completely cut off from the industrialized world, or the technological world, I guess you could say, you know, where they still live the way they've always lived. And we know they're there, but don't have any communication with them that those cultures and those communities, especially ones that are on islands will be wiped off the face of the earth, because of our actions, and then Jim Stump 48:55 even the ones that aren't on islands, the ecosystems are going to change so dramatically already in Africa and South America, the kinds of crops that you can grow, and when you can grow them are changing pretty rapidly. And those kinds of indigenous cultures that have always done things the same way are not going to be able to keep doing those. Ian Binns 49:14 Yeah, and it but it's very tragic that, you know, the Western world has to be has to know that its impact, at least the general thought seems to be that some believe that, well, it's not in my backyard. I guess that's the best way of saying that. Yeah. Jim Stump 49:31 And that again, is part of this, like, that's part of the psychology that makes this so difficult to communicate because it's not immediate and in your face, it's off down the road or in another part of the world or something like that. Ian Binns 49:45 Sure. And that's the loving others. Yep. Right. And so, you know, obviously if you identify as Christian, you can use Christian scripture to help you with that. But even if you don't identify as Christian or even if you don't benefit as a person of any faith whatsoever, you can still recognize the importance of loving others of caring about other people. So, to me, this is another Ask whatever your motivation is to help you care for others. Jim Stump 50:13 This is another aspect of communicating to to two people that about these issues that again, span or try to at least span the culture war issues, that the theoretical side of this so we do this a lot in practice and have lots of stories to tell about trying to communicate to people in that regard. But there's a really fascinating theoretical aspect behind it. I don't know if you guys know that social psychologist, Jonathan Hite and his book, The righteous mind from a few years ago. And these moral foundations that people intuitively use to make their decisions and the research that he's done on the political left and the political right, primarily, and which of those moral foundations are most important to them. And you, you see pretty clearly that people who identify as liberal or progressive rank the highest on these moral foundations of care and fairness, and many of us that are on that at least lean that way, think that we can make these arguments just by appealing to Shouldn't we care about these other people? Isn't this fair, in order that the people who have, you know not caused this problem, they shouldn't have to be the one suffering from it. And the way you and I both just talked about this issue, that's what we were appealing to, whereas most people on the political right end of the spectrum rank way higher in these moral intuitions on liberty, and authority. And one of the challenges we face is how do we appeal to those kinds of moral foundations to talk about these issues? Because for them, they hear well, this isn't fair. Well, but their response is, well, you can't take away my liberty, you can't take away my choice. Right? Life isn't fair. Yeah, life isn't fair. Sorry, but or appeal to some other authority that they accept. So I think that's one of the big challenges for us in this business of how do we talk about these issues that are so important in ways that tap into the moral intuitions of people who are different than we are people who, who don't value is highly some of those other things that we value Ian Binns 52:34 was obviously the last two years of this pandemic have made that that contrast even more, even more, 52:40 even more? You're right, Zack Jackson 52:43 so we need a good alien invasion. Some some common enemy. So Jim Stump 52:48 I'll tell you though, at the beginning of this pandemic, we at BioLogos said this is going to be what rallies the church to take science more seriously. We thought this is really the opportunity. And within a few months, it was no, the opposite of that has happened. Yeah. So Ian Binns 53:06 yes, very tragic. Those witness. Zack Jackson 53:10 Yeah, definitely solve those ideologies take over. And they made certain issues, political that I never imagined a million years could be political. And then I learned so much during that time about what it means to communicate with people and understand other people's values and try to communicate through them to find find some common language, not even common values, but a common way of communicating truth that I'm still working on very much. So Jim Stump 53:39 there's another book if I can point it to. That's been very helpful for me in this regard to by a legal scholar by the name of John in NA zoo, the books called confident pluralism, which I think is really, really important. I actually just did a podcast interview with him about two months ago on our feed, you can find it but confident pluralism is he's coining this phrase to try to talk about how do we hold to our own convictions in a society where we can't, and probably shouldn't just impose them on other people. So the confident side is this isn't relativism, where we just say anything goes I really believe this is the truth. And I think it's really important, but the pluralism side is, I recognize that my neighbor down the road believes something different with the equal amount of fervor that I believe. So how do we in that kind of society have meaningful conversations? How do we try to break through these culture war bundles that that are there and the he talks primarily in terms of Supreme Court cases in the book because that's what he is. He's a scholar of the Supreme Court, Supreme Court, but really pushes us towards thinking within our communities. How do we move towards tolerance Where again, it's not just in some wimpy sort of anything goes, but rather, to be tolerant that I know other people don't all believe the same the way I do, and I shouldn't just exile them. And tolerance kind of plays off of certainty in a in a certain sense, where maybe toning down my certainty helps to communicate with people a little bit more, but he tries to push towards tolerance and humility and patience, that I think those are all really, really helpful ways of trying to engage people who believe differently than you do. Ian Binns 55:36 I appreciate that recommendation. Zack Jackson 55:39 Absolutely. Thank you for that. And we'll make sure to put those those links in the show notes, as well as links to your books that folks can can purchase and read, and all the resources that you've mentioned from BioLogos as well. Here at the end of our time together, first of all, I want to say a huge thank you absolutely half of the rest of our hosts and all of our listeners for spending this time with us. And before you go, what's coming up on the on your podcast that we can look forward to? Jim Stump 56:12 Yeah, so this conference that we have coming up, we're going to do a live a live recording, which always sounds funny, because it's not like any recording isn't live, but we're gonna have a studio audience. That's what I should say, we're going to have a studio audience in front of us to record a conversation that I'll have with the artist Makoto Fujimura. To talk about creation, what does it mean to be creative, and to be made in the image of God? And what are the consequences that we find between science and art in some of those in some of those ways. We're going to do a whole series on climate change coming up in the not too distant, not too distant future. We did a we did a series last summer on what it means to be human that was a little different from the typical episode where I sit down and talk to somebody for an hour like we're doing here. But it's a little more highly produced, where we go out and talk to two experts in a number of different fields, and then have a narrative where we weave in, weave in quotes from from them. Throughout that. We are going to do a conversation with NT right about the resurrection for the week, right before Easter that will be coming up that I look forward to that we just recorded last week, an episode with Bill McKibben, who's one of the leading scientists, climate change activists, that was a pretty fun conversation than otherwise, we are looking toward the summer and putting together a couple of other series. One of them is related to a new project that I have going on. That is what I'm calling the spiritual journey of Homo sapiens. How did we become the kind of creatures that we are? And can we see in the journey of our species, something analogous to a spiritual journey of us as an individual, the highs and lows that we go through that helped to shape us and form us into into what we are today? So Zack Jackson 58:21 we're looking at like, Paleolithic spirituality? Jim Stump 58:26 How did this get started, I have a trip to Europe, hopefully, this next fall, where I'm even going to look at some of the cave paintings as some of these earliest sort of sorts of intimations of, of at least the records we have of our ancestors, looking at something else feel, you know, in a symbolic way of trying to figure out why we're here and who we are and all that. So I'm our series Zack Jackson 58:53 on human evolution was one of them. It was my favorite series that that is where my, my brain is these days, and what gets me excited. So that's wonderful to hear that you're doing that as that Ian Binns 59:03 sounds fascinating. Let me know if you need someone to go with you to hold your carry your suitcases. That just sounds fascinating. Jim Stump 59:15 We'll see if it happens. That's the plan right now. Ian Binns 59:18 Good luck with that. That sounds really interesting. Yeah. Yeah. And as that moves forward, if that does happen, we'll have to have you back on to talk more about that. Because that that really does sound interesting. I'd be happy to. Zack Jackson 59:30 Yeah, well, once again, you can listen to that and 109 other episodes of the language of God podcast, you can find that on BioLogos or wherever it is that you find your podcasts wherever you're listening right now. You can also find the language of God podcast. So thank you so much, Jim, for being here today and for spending this time with us. was a really wonderful hour with you. Thanks, Zack. Jim Stump 59:53 Thanks, Ian. Happy to do it. Thank you
Episode 102 How do we mark the passage of time, and how do we encounter the divine within it? From Shabbat to the Eucharist, our religious rituals play with time in unexpected ways. Take some time with us and explore the many ways that you can create sacred time wherever and whenever you are. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are Kendra Holt-Moore 00:15 Kendra Holt, more assistant professor of religion at Bethany college and my favorite TV show all time is Avatar The Last Airbender Zack Jackson 00:25 Zack Jackson, UCC pastor and Reading Pennsylvania and my favorite TV show of all time is Dr. Joe Ian Binns 00:31 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte. And I got a lot of TV shows that kept popping up, but the one that just keeps coming to mind right now, I would say is probably Ted LA. So Rachael Jackson 00:45 Rachel Jackson, Rabbi Agoudas, Israel, congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina and favorite TV show of all time is the Big Bang Theory. Yeah, that's a good one is a good one. And this question is sort of a, you know, a little bit of an in and an intro to what we're talking about today, because it's our favorite TV show of all time. And that's what we're going to be talking about today. Thanks, like, Zack Jackson 01:15 I segue. I like that even smoother. Rachael Jackson 01:23 So we are talking about time. And unlike the the last two episodes, where we actually I think at this point, we'll have three episodes where we've talked about time, I wanted to talk about more of a corporeal human time and the experience and really just add the Jewish lens to this. We are saying before we really started recording that. Wow, I love being Jewish, and I have no problems talking about it and sharing it. I don't use that and present that as the lens. But that's really where my focus is going to be today. Because that's how I really understand time and its meaning. And so I'm going to give several examples of what that's going to look like. But I want to start with sort of a poetic read. This comes from reformed judaism.org. They have a blog series, and this comes from almost 10 years ago, but time doesn't matter. And words like this, get held thanks to social media and the internet. We can listen to them 10 years from now or 10 years from when it was written till now. So, but just giving it a little bit of a frame, this was written by Stacy's does Robinson, Zoho Nam live Aha. So she died. Not too not too long ago, and she died of COVID, unfortunately. But she's an incredible author and incredible poet. And so this is what she tells us. When my son was born, I cradled him against my heart, arms wrapped to gently get surely around his small and fragile body, I would stand holding him. Our breaths mingles our hearts beating in an elegant call and response, one beat to the next. And I would sway a slow and gentle side to side rock that lasted for the eternity, that exists between heartbeats, I could feel his body relax into the motion, like oceans, like drifting, like peace, above the simplicity of that rhythm, the warmth of him the smell of his newness and his infinite possibilities. As he drifted as he gem told my own body would react in kind, and I followed him, these moments became our own Fibonacci sequence, the delicate curve of our bodies in motion at rest, in motion again, twined in an eternal spiral, more intimate than a lover's kiss repeated again and again. And again. There's so much time that passes. Now, this is me, that is the end of what I'm going to share of hers for now at least verbatim. But I'll reference a little bit that too. There's so much time that passes in a heartbeat. If you ask someone, how long does this take? There cannot possibly be a single answer. It depends. But what were you how are you getting there? How old were you? How long has COVID lasted Technically speaking, technically, I can remember March of 2020. March 9, we did Perot, I, this is how I'm wound in Jewish time right now. So we did Param. And we had these Inklings. And there was something happening to the west to the east of us and something in a different country. And we weren't quite sure what was happening. And we did Param. And then we didn't come back to the sanctuary for 15 months, but in open the building for 15 months. And that's still been, that was still nine months ago. And here we are. My son, seven years old, finally got vaccinated in December. And there's still people here on this podcast and here who are listening, whose children have not yet been able to be vaccinated. So how long is this pandemic is still going on param for us is in three weeks. We'll be back in our sanctuary together. And we'll be wearing our masks, because that's what perm is about wearing masks. The problem is we'll be wearing two masks, the ones over our nose in our mouth and the one over our eyes, the ones that is a custom and the one that is for protection. So how long is COVID My son was in kindergarten when he got sent home. And he was at home in first grade. And he did virtual in second grade. And when I went and saw him this morning for STEM week show Intel he was in his classroom, five feet away from all the other students still wearing his mask, just like they all did. Not having any playdates. Because it's COVID. So how long is COVID for him? His whole life. He doesn't know times before COVID existed. That wasn't part of his memory. How long is COVID for me? A very, very long time. But something that I can see a life before and a life after. Because time, while quantifiable is meaningless. If we only use a clock, we have to use a relative understanding of time and how we relate to it. And in Judaism, it's I find it so beautiful. That we create time. So let me ask you, the three of you. When is Hanukkah Ian Binns 07:49 right before Christmas. Rachael Jackson 07:51 Right before Christmas. Ian Binns 07:55 The winter season? Rachael Jackson 07:57 Winter season. Ian Binns 07:59 Typically when What's the date? Kendra Holt-Moore 08:02 Is this a trick question? Zack Jackson 08:03 No. It's never the same day all the time. What if we lived every day like it was Rachael Jackson 08:15 a miracle. Clean up your stuff, rededicate yourself to your people and your God Zack Jackson 08:22 and slaughter some solutions and Rachael Jackson 08:25 don't forget to pick up the pig guts. Like that's just messy. Could we not? That's right. Yeah. So what is Hanukkah? Ian Binns 08:33 December actual real Rachael Jackson 08:35 true. When Zack Jackson 08:36 I mean, it's different every year, right? It's the lunar calendar. Rachael Jackson 08:40 The 25th of Kislev. You're giving me What's this? 25th of Kislev? Ah, that's the same every year the 25th of Kislev. It doesn't change. I know exactly when it is. But Zack Jackson 08:54 does it change according it only changes from my perspective, Rachael Jackson 08:57 right? It only changes from our calendar because the majority of our calendar is the Gregorian calendar, not the Jewish calendar. So when is Hanukkah in December, ish this last year, it was in November this coming year, it's going to overlap with Christmas and if we thought it was bad last year where there was nothing Hanukkah, nothing's gonna happen this year because Christmas will win out. There will be not even inkling of Hanukkah wrapping paper. That is what it is. Yeah. So when is it? Well, it depends whose perspective you're asking. And it depends how excited you are. I don't really care that much about Hanukkah. It's kind of a tiny little nothing holiday I only get excited because I have a child. We have the same question of when is Passover? When is Purim when is Rosh Hashanah, I have an exact date for when those things are. But that's not how I live my life. When is Shabbat? The Israeli calendar is marvelous. I love it. So Jews are terrible at naming things like absolutely terrible. Imagine if all of our holidays in America were named similar to July 4. Like if you didn't know, and you came into America and everyone's like, Whoa, it's July 4. And you have no idea what that means. It is just a date on the calendar. Right? It doesn't tell you Oh, it's independence day. It's Memorial Day. It's Veterans Day. It's Presidents Day. You know what the day is? Almost all of the Jewish holidays are to Shabbat of the ninth of have to have the 15th of have to be Shabbat, the 15th of the month of Shabbat like this is not helpful. Except for some biblical holidays. Where, you know, Rosh Hashanah isn't actually called Rosh Hashanah. Yom true on the day of the sounding it's the day you get to go make noise with the kazoo marvelous. So when we name the days of the week, we don't use Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, right? Those are Greek and Roman gods. Those are not the days of the week. It's yom, Yom Sheni, Yom slushy, Yom obra, day one, day two, day three, day four, day five, day six and Shabbat. We don't say Yom seven, we don't say the seventh day we say Shabbat. It is different in and of itself. Because our frame of reference is not that it's Saturday, our frame of reference is that this day is completely set apart from all other days. When we look on our calendars as Americans, we look on the calendar and go okay, Monday through Friday, those days are particular and then oh, Saturday, Sunday. That's what we're gearing for. we frame our mind differently because of our response to time. One other sort of piece that I want to add for how we then mix time, so I've only been talking about my time, right? I, in this day and age, I'm looking forward to you know, this next upcoming poram Or this upcoming PESA or this upcoming Shabbat, right like we're recording this on a Friday, and I'm going home, oh boy. I have to lead services and five hours and I haven't written my sermon. Oh, boy. Right. That's so exciting. So how do I? How do I understand that time, like not just freaking out that it's five hours from now, and I haven't finished my sermon or started it. Tell people. But when I think about Passover, which is the story of the Jews leaving Exodus, or leaving Egypt in the Exodus, and we can talk in chat, we can check on chat on our Facebook groups about how literal we might take that. Right, we can that's not the conversation that we're gonna have at this moment, though, did did the Exodus actually happen? So that's not going to be part of my conversation. But there is the question of not the question. I shouldn't frame it that way. When we celebrate Passover and commemorate the Exodus, there are four children. The wise child's this simple child's, the child's who is so simple, they do not even know how to ask, and then the wicked child. Okay. So if the why the y's child says, Tell me all about this and what is the purpose of these greens? And what is the purpose of this and ask all these questions? What do you think the wicked child is? Non rhetorical? There's no wrong answers. Zack Jackson 14:32 I feel like there's a few wrong it's Rachael Jackson 14:35 a right answer, but there's no wrong answers. Zack Jackson 14:37 Okay, cuz I'm thinking an Egyptian child would be pretty bad. But that's probably not the answer here. Kendra Holt-Moore 14:45 Kendra, ah, I'm trying to remember because I've been to Rachael Jackson 14:50 a few. Save right because you've been to a few supreme Kendra Holt-Moore 14:53 Yeah. And the wicked child when we go around the table. There's always like handful of people that are like, I think I'm the wicked child. So, I'm trying to remember because I think there's a couple that I get confused, but isn't the way your child, the one who, like asks too many questions or just is like a little bit. Like, out of the status quo of how they, like, think and problem solve. And so they're more disruptive, which is not, you know, I mean, it's like the wicked child, but in different contexts. It's not necessarily about like being good or bad. It's just different. Rachael Jackson 15:31 Okay? It's kind of you're kind of mixing several of them in together. I, there's Kendra Holt-Moore 15:35 two that I'm always like. So the Rachael Jackson 15:37 wise one is the one who's always asking the questions. This is what we want, right? Yay. Asking questions. The wicked one asks, but a single question. And he says, What does this have to do with me? Zack Jackson 15:54 Huh? Okay. Rachael Jackson 15:57 Yeah. Whoa. And when we read the text, when we go through the Haggadah, and we we read, we asked, we say my father was a wandering Aramean. Okay, spoiler alert. My dad wasn't my dad was born in Australia. Like, he was not a wandering Aramean. But we say it in the present tense. God took me out of Egypt with an outstretched hand, bah, bah, bah, bah, bah, right? I was there. I wasn't, I was there. I am there. I am going through this. And when we sing the same song, who is like you, Oh, mighty when Myka mocha by alien. I don't know who is like you're among the gods who? Who was this? Who took me out of this place? Who is taking me through redemption? Not going through the theology piece here today, just looking at time. Well, that exists in the Bible that exists in the Torah. That was theoretically, you know, 3300 years ago, I wasn't there. I'm only 41. But I was there. This is my story. This is my understanding of how time works, that it's now so even though it happened at one point, I was there and I am now and it is now. So that there's a meshing of while I might be looking at particular days in particular ways as how am I going to write my sermon? And when am I going to have for dinner? And who am I going to dress up as for Purim? Right. Am I going to be varsity this year? Or am I going to be I'm always a good character, by the way, always. I'm never the evil one. Ian Binns 17:48 I think that's fitting. Rachael Jackson 17:49 Thank you. I think so. Yeah. Ian Binns 17:52 No, I thought him were here. He was he Yeah, Rachael Jackson 17:54 he'd be Haman. Okay. Yeah, without a doubt he'd be or he'd be the guys. That's moto. Hi, spies. eavesdrops, on, where he's kind of there. But he's not really there. But he's totally a bystander. Now, I love Adam. He's much more of an upstander than any of those characters. He's just, he's easy to pick on. So time is not just what am I doing? It's about how do I go back and forth. And so my final thing, as I'm just like rambling at all, is, I understand time, Jewish type specifically, and my my life living a Jewish life as a slinky. So imagine your slinky, and I hope you've had the chance to play with a slinky recently because they're awesome. And it's closed. So imagine a closed slinky. And you're at the very start, and just go down one rung, it doesn't feel like anything has changed. It's the same time as last year, you're the same person that you were last year, not a whole lot. It's been different. But now imagine you're a slinky on a stair, and how far the distance is between one rung and the next rung. When it's opened like that. It's so much different, but it's the same time. So it allows us to come back together and allows us to check in with ourselves and say, Okay, I've been here before, but I'm completely different, or I'm not so different. It just asked us questions. So that's my sort of brief, very long sort of Drush on what time looks like and how we understand it quarterly. Kendra Holt-Moore 19:56 The, the thing that I I keep thinking of As you're talking about, I mean, it wasn't really like the central piece of what you're saying, but totally like thinking about time in Judaism. I'm blanking on the name of the, the, the book or like the essay that Abraham Joshua Heschel wrote about, like time was like the, the tabernacle of time, where like in Judaism, what is you can think of architecture as marking something off that is holy, in like, if you go to like a cathedral, like a Catholic Cathedral or something, there's way of using materiality to mark off space as designated, like holy locations. But I Abraham Joshua Heschel published a collection of like essays talking about how in Judaism, we have these really beautiful examples of, you know, not not so much like architecture, marking off holy space, but Shabbat as like a marker of holy time. And it's like, you know, he's like, using the metaphor of, like, the tabernacle of time, I think, is what he calls it. And so that's what I kept thinking about, because it's such a, like, the, the rhythm of Shabbat, being, you know, it's not just this, you know, it's more than just like something you take for granted, every week as a celebration, or like a time of rest. But Hashem just talks about it in this really beautiful way as being, like a marker to orient you to time itself as this special, special thing that is, it's, it's part of our rhythm of, you know, our bodies and our communities and our calendars. And I just love that metaphor of like, a tabernacle of time, in addition to or as a different thing from, like, a tabernacle in space. Rachael Jackson 22:11 I so glad that you brought that up. So I think the essays that you're referring to are contained in a book called The Sabbath. Kendra Holt-Moore 22:20 Yeah, yeah. Rachael Jackson 22:22 It's straightforward, straightforward. Again, we don't really, you know, mince our title is very much. You want to talk about time, the Sabbath. So one of the things that Heschel talks about and is actually in pretty much all Jewish books that talk about the tabernacle, or let's just use English, the sanctuary, a church, a synagogue, the place that you go, it doesn't matter. And that's, I know, we talked a little bit about this a year ago, maybe two years ago, when we're really talking about COVID. And not being in our spaces, and how that really isn't as challenging for Jews, as it is for other cultures and other religions. Because while we like our space, we don't define holiness, by the space our holiness is divided is defined solely by time, which means it can happen anywhere, it can be in the wilderness, it can be with ice cream, it can be with your child's it can be in a sanctuary, it can literally be anywhere. And that sacredness of time as opposed to sacredness of place is something you know that I love about Judaism, I'm not gonna say it doesn't exist in other religions a because I don't know all other religions be because I think that's a little too narcissistic, as, as a culture to say that we're the only ones to do it. But it does feel that it really doesn't matter where we are. It's about when we are so much so. I'm gonna poke fun of us for just a second. There are these rules that you there are things you can't do on Shabbat, right? Like you can't turn on light switches and you can't create a fire and you can't drive and you can't cook and you can't ride an elevator and I could keep going on and on about the sorry juice. Some of the extremely ridiculous things that we do in the name of Jewish law haha. But one of them that's been around for a long time is fire because we've had fire for a very long time. And so we're not supposed to light the Shabbat lights like fire is not fire is prohibited. You can't do that on Shabbat. But you have to light Shabbat candles. So how do you do that? Like how do you light Shabbat candles on Shabbat? We fool ourselves. We fool ourselves. It's beautiful. So what we do is we strike the match. We light the lights, we then cover our eyes, say the blessing. Open our eyes and go, Oh, look at that. candles are lit and now it's Shabbat. It's amazing. Zack Jackson 25:26 Whatever. Right? Okay, so Rachael Jackson 25:30 if you ever see somebody, right, I'm sure when you've seen Fiddler on the Roof, there's two sections when they're doing the Sabbath prayer, right? May the Lord protect and defend you that whole thing? Seriously, nothing. I'm looking at the three of you, and there's no recognition there. It's amazing. Well, but Zack Jackson 25:49 it's been a long time ago. Sorry. Rachael Jackson 25:52 Oh, Kendra, that's your homework. That is your homework. So anyway, so she's their blessing their family, and they like, do this whole, like waving the candle flames, and then they cover their eyes, and they say this beautiful blessing. It's because we're fooling ourselves of when that happened. Which leads me to sort of another question for you all, if we're looking at what time is, who decides? Who decides? So let's use a Shabbat as an example. In modern America, secular America, most Jews are not politically religious, in the sense of okay, Shabbat is when the sun goes down, and I have to be home and I'm not doing like etc, etc. Most Jews in America are not that way. And so, when is Shabbat at our particular synagogue, right now, we're having services at 530 on Friday night. And in three weeks, when we go through a time change, it's still going to be bright outside when we leave, and we're done with our service. Right? So we then have to say, well, when is Shabbat? So when is something actually happening? When we say it's happening? When we engage in activity? When the culture says it's happening, like when is or if we take also the majority of Jews. Question seven already, many Jews? Never. They don't observe Shabbat. So is Shabbat Shabbat because we observe it is or is it just a Saturday? So I'd ask the same question Quantum. Yeah. So I'm asking that question, again, using Shabbat as the example or the Sabbath as the example. But for anything, is it your birthday? Right? Again, we're all adults here. My birthday is technically March 2, because that's the day that I was born. I have four meetings on March 2, and it's a Wednesday. I'm celebrating my birthday on March 1. So when is my birthday? When should somebody say to me happy birthday, when do I open my cards Ian Binns 28:17 all of March. That's what I do. Like my, my birthday is on April 3, and this year, it's a it's a Sunday, so I'm good. But even like when my birthday is on the day that I have class. Oh, I tell my students, I let them know what y'all know. It's my birthday. Just Just saying. The class goes. Zack Jackson 28:46 So at the time of recording, and this obviously is going to go out in a couple of weeks. There's something similar going around in Christian circles. You may have seen in your Facebook feeds, that this one priest had been baptizing children incorrectly. One word wrong. He had, instead of saying, I now baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son of the Holy Spirit, he had been saying, we now baptize you, in the name of the Father, the Son of the Holy Spirit. We instead of I, we instead of I. And through a number of higher ups, having councils and discussing whether or not this actually changed the intent of the baptism itself, they decided that enough had been changed in the intent behind that word change that invalidated every baptism he had done for 20 years. Because the congregation present does not do the baptism. So their affirmation of it is irrelevant. Of course, according to the Catholic theology, God is the one that does the act, the actual, like sanctifying grace disposing act on dispensing not just those. No disposing of children, please. We go into that theology and the priest is the conduit by which that happens. And so the I in that sentence is the priest speaking through God. And so by saying, We, then you're just, it muddies the waters a little bit, and the priest has resigned and he has offered to re baptize anyone who's feels that their baptism is no longer valid, because technically, it's not valid anymore. And in all of the circles that I run in, between all Protestant circles, we were all people who were like, hey, nothing magical happens here. Our act of baptism is that it is not something that is happening in that moment. Nothing changes about that person in that moment. What is happening is it is a an A outward affirmation of an inward and invisible reality that a child is born. Beloved, already, a child is born already a part of the family of God, a child is born already having been awash in God's grace, and mercy and goodness. And the act of baptism is an act in which the community gathers together to affirm that truth that already existed time immemorial. And so whether that child is baptized on the day they're born, or when they're 99 years old, whether it is done using the right magic words, or some other totally different vernacular a bad thing? This is a good thing for me. I made something of the way goes, giant. I can't wait to see you're trying to Okay. Could you hear it? I want to Ian Binns 31:59 see his giant castle. Kendra Holt-Moore 32:00 Did he say the banjo is not a bad thing. It's a good thing. Zack Jackson 32:04 He says this is not a bad emergency. This is a good emergency. I made a giant Castle that's important. And I'll be up in a few minutes to come see it. Okay, Kendra Holt-Moore 32:14 got to work on your definition of emergency. Zack Jackson 32:19 Timing. I say one thing and that's when he descends into the basement and comes and plays the banjo in the back of this little studio. Rachael Jackson 32:28 And you were done such a Zack Jackson 32:29 train of thought was? Well. So you know, it's almost ironic, though, that my child were to come in here when talking about during the time in which I'm talking about in which God has granted God's blessing on to children before they were born. And before they had a chance to identify it, or have it be given to them from an exterior source because, man oh man, we need to be reminded of that sometimes when you are in the middle of something like recording a podcast and your four year old decides to play a banjo in the room you're recording it in, because that child has already been a Washington grace and goodness and forgiveness. And I too, have been a Washington that very same spirit and me to learn how to honor and forgive and appreciate the toddler's giant Lego Castle he wants me to see. But the point being in their theology, there was a particular moment in which Grace was dispensed in a special way from God on to that child, it can happen one time, you cannot be baptized again. In fact, they they murdered quite a bit of Anabaptists in the Reformation because of that, there's one time only that it can be done. And when you believe that there's one time only that this can be done then there's a whole lot of now stricter rules that have Ian Binns 33:59 to come with it. And the ramifications for this like I saw the headline and read a little bit about the situation with this you know the Catholic priests making an error with the use of the word we instead of I and you know I didn't spend too much time Reading an article about it but it just seemed like that there was there's some speculation I guess that this could have bigger impacts depending on how the whoever the powers that be decided on the rules, right? Like um, like, if you're not baptized, considered baptized, can you get married in the church? The Catholic Church are there certain rules that you cannot like you have to be baptized Catholic will do certain things in Catholic churches I thought or something along Zack Jackson 34:48 not to be married. No, at least one of you has to be Catholic but you can be baptized Protestant and still be married in a Catholic church as long as one of the other ones Catholic you can take promise to raise your children me Catholic You can't take communion? No. Okay. But if you promised to raise your child as a Catholic, then they will let you be married in a church. Ian Binns 35:08 Yeah. But anyway, I just remember seeing that and just being amazed by it. Rachael Jackson 35:13 Right. And I appreciate that you brought that that piece in Zach, because it's really talking about when does something happen? Right, when? Yeah, when does it happen? And there are a few, there are a few moments in life that give us those very definite, this is when it happened. When are you born? Well, let's, let's just go with the medical piece there. When you exit the womb, right, that's, that's when you're born Zack Jackson 35:48 when. But when the head exits? Well, because some children Rachael Jackson 35:51 are not born head first. Right? So, you know, but when someone puts on their birth certificate, What time were you born? Right? It's when you scream. Right? That's what time you're born when you scream. So your heads got to be out whether or not that was first or not. But you have to scream. And that's when you're born. Now modern medicine that feels modern medicine Zack Jackson 36:16 when you are first alive. Rachael Jackson 36:19 Yeah, that all happens within a minute, right? Even with even with babies or especially with babies that are not born headfirst. Right? They're just out. Zack Jackson 36:28 Rachel, I have a question for you about religious time. So as we're as we're talking, I'm remembering a concept. From I think I'd first read it in something written by Mircea Eliade, I'm sure I'm butchering the pronunciation of his name, about the importance of an axis mundi in religion, the center of the world, as it were, and that in the same older Israelite religions, that was the temple on mountain Zion, that was the, the place that connected the underworld with the heavens, that, that sort of central location to the world and every religion has that, right. That's, that's Mount Olympus, that's, you know, all the holy mountains, usually in the ancient world. And then the temples gone in 70 ad, and people are scattered, both Christian and Jewish people scattered to the winds. And the Christians later do find other centers at that point right in Rome especially becomes our center forever, and what becomes the Vatican and all of that the Jews don't get a center for arguably, even now don't really have a center, at least religiously. Christians seem to have then gone back to their being physical spaces, physical centers, as opposed to the temporal centers. As but what from what I hear you talking about? The Sabbath kind of becomes the temple. It does that does that track with kind of the the history of the development of the two religions? Rachael Jackson 38:26 I think so. And you're, I think from a point of interest you very much like second temple times, right? That's that's where that's where you thrive? First, yes, yes. Like you, like that's just sort of you, you really gravitate toward that time period. That is my least favorite time period in Judaism. Ian Binns 38:49 Why? And remind myself and those of us who are not familiar with the time frame, your calendar time frame, yearly time frame, what Rachael Jackson 39:01 Thank you. First Temple first Temple was destroyed 586 BCE. The Jews were then allowed to come back 60 years later reconstruction it reconstructed the tempo plus or minus 520 BCE. It was then destroyed 70 C. And so second temple is considered, you know, 520 BCE to 70. C, by the way, I'm using C as common era or Before Common Era, Zack used ad, which translates to a year of our Lord, which is pretty common, or BC, you know, typically understood as before Christ. And so, for those that do not use Christ as a center point in time, but we still need to communicate that this is the year 2022. We just have communicated as BCE and see. Zack Jackson 39:57 It also is a little problematic that Jesus was likely born between three or four BC, so Jesus was born before Ian Binns 40:04 I use, but Rachael Jackson 40:05 that makes a lot of sense. You know, I was born before I became something too, so. Zack Jackson 40:10 So why don't you like that period of time. Rachael Jackson 40:13 Um, so just generally speaking, I find that there's just, it's uncomfortable for me, because it feels very inviting. And that's to reminiscent of today. As far as Jews are concerned, I think that there's a lot of us and them within the Jewish world nowadays, just like, and I see that as an us and them when we look at Second Temple times. It's great Hanukkah started as a Jewish civil war. And I just don't, I don't like that. It just, it just makes me too sad. Frankly. That's why I don't like it. It makes me too sad. The Ian Binns 40:48 split with the northern kingdom, Rachael Jackson 40:50 the what split? Oh, that was. So the United Kingdom. Again, if we look at this, from a literal standpoint, the United Kingdom was 1000 BCE. And it was only united for three kings. So really not very long. And then the 10 tribes were theoretically lost, also known as probably the leaders got taken away and they got split up because, you know, bigger, better competitors came along, and that was 722 BC. Yeah, very, very different time period Zack Jackson 41:27 of sort of civil wars, totally different. There's the influence of the Greeks after Alexander comes through which there's a whole Hellenized wing aspect of, of that region, and then you've got the Jews and Alexandria and the Jews and Babylon and the Jews in Judea, not to mention the Samaritans and the rise of Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes zealots, a whole Christians, the whole gamut of splintering, and it's very traumatic, which might be why I like it. Rachael Jackson 41:58 And that's why I don't Yeah, it's too much. It's like, are you reform or conservative? Well, I'm Reconstructionist. And I'm humanistic. And I'm Orthodox, but modern Orthodox, but open Orthodox, but just regular Orthodox, just ultra orthodox, and you're not even Jewish to me. And it's just, it's just to Ian Binns 42:15 all connected to this god. Rachael Jackson 42:20 Right. So it's just talking to somebody theoretically, I was just talking to somebody about you know, the prayer, the Shema, which comes from Deuteronomy, here, O Israel, the Lord is God, the Lord is One, etc. I like it better in the Hebrew, right Shema Yisrael, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai. God. I said, Well, kind of person who's not Jewish say that. So Well, sure. Right. It's, it's in the Bible. Lots of people say it. It's just sort of what your intent is. So what does it mean for God? I said, well, it it's a statement of if you believe in up to one god up to one god yeah, so yes, and Ian. But to go back to Zacks to go back to Zags, a whole point of where and when, and does that track? Yes, I think that totally tracks for it's not a when, and frankly, let's look at Judaism from the scriptures itself. Were like where, where was Judaism in the Torah? Nowhere, which means everywhere. So the Torah was given in the wilderness, the Torah wasn't given in Jerusalem, the Torah was given in Israel, the Torah was given in the wilderness, they were just wandering. They didn't know who or where they were. And that's when we get the tour. That's quite literally what's happening in this week's post shocky Tisa, like this week, we're Reading about when Moses goes up onto the mountain and God's like, Here have some stones that I carved and Moses is like, sweet, and then God's like, he should go back down there because they made an idol out of gold, and it turned into a calf and perhaps you should control that better. And Moses comes down and she's like, Are you kidding me? And pearls, the tablets and all that stuff? Like that's literally what we're Reading this week. So now y'all at home can check when we recorded this. So there is no place in Judaism. It's all about time. And in this exact same portion, it talks about the Sabbath. Like this is what you should do. And let me just also clarify one other piece when I'm talking about Sabbath and we talk about rest. We're not resting because oh my god, the other six days are so hard. That's Saturday. I that's what a Saturday is. It's a whole boy, I had so many meetings and so many emails and these kids are driving me nuts. Like, I just need a day like that Saturday, that's a day of rest. Mazel Tov, we all 100% need that Shabbat is, I am not resting to recover or prepare for I am resting simply to acknowledge that I exist now in this time, not for what I was or what I will be for right now. That's why Jews also still need a two day week right? We still are Americans. We still need a Sunday. We need a day that does not do. Right. That's our Sunday but that's not Shabbat. Shabbat rest is not weekend rest. It's a it's a complete wholeness of right now. And being connected to the text that was 3000 years ago and 3000 years from now. But really, it's just this moment. And we don't, we don't need a place for that. So our centrality? Yeah, wherever you want to be. Which is why a shout out to Rabbi Jaime Korngold who was the rabbi who had my did my bat mitzvah with her. She's the adventurer, Rabbi, I've talked about her a couple of times, right? She has Shabbat on the ski slopes, right? Shabbat on the slopes, they keep talking about mountains, Zach, great, go skiing and then have a Shabbat together. Right 15 minutes and the Shema say a few other prayers and go back skin. That's amazing. It was good enough for Israelite ancestors is good enough for us. Ian Binns 47:10 One, so some of the readings you sent. Yeah, it makes me like I want to get the whole book. First of all, you know, like, the rejoice in your festivals, the Jewish year, sacred time in the Jewish calendar, just Reading some of that, but you know, the whole it is the when and not aware of prayer that counts the most in Judaism. Judaism is a religion. Indeed, the first religion and by and large the only religion that sanctifies time over space. And I just, I just find that really interesting. So it's not it's not the where you do it. It's the the time that you stopped to pray, is that right? Rachael Jackson 47:59 It's not even stopping to pray, necessarily. It's a time of connection, whether that's connection. And so this is why I say up to one God, because when you pray, there's this idea that you're praying to God. Right? That's a very Christian. Ian Binns 48:17 Yeah, please. So I guess what, I just keep thinking back to the, what we continue to find ourselves in with this pandemic. Right, and how, you know, we, you know, the whole world obviously went, has gone through time periods, some still going through it, and around the world have not been able to do like, go into places of worship, they want to people, you know, places around the world where people don't worship at all, they have no faith at all, in any kind of deity that we consider. Right? But that they're still limited on where they can go. How about that. So places, you know, that's still occurring around the world, and in some spaces in the US as well. And so, you know, but I remember when this first started, you know, and, and everything happened and people initially came together when everything was shut down. But then finally, it was, especially in our state, Rachel, in North Carolina, the you cannot shut down our churches, you cannot shut down our churches, like if we cannot be in our church, then we are not able to worship and I did not instill do not hold to that view. You know, I? Yes, when I go into the sanctuary of our church, it is a very, it has a very profound and powerful impact on me. It becomes very inspirational. I mean, there are many times where I start I'll take my phone out, start writing notes, and just things because it just inspires me every time I'm there, because I feel that connection, right. But I was I still felt to me it was like, I think especially with me, as one of the The lay leaders of the church of trying to help, you know, offer up worships at worship service every week on faith on Facebook for almost a year. I took it as like, almost like a, not a test of my faith, but as they making sure I understand, at least to me, the true meaning of all this and the faith is that it's not necessarily in that building. That's, that's not where it should occur for me. Right? It needs to be within me my time I, wherever I am. Right? It does not matter, I guess. And so that's why Reading that just really has such a profound impact on me, because it's just like, to me that's beautiful, of recognizing that it's more than the bricks and mortar that we find ourselves in. That should be bigger than that. Right? And that's, again, goes back to the whole limiting thing, I think back to our first episode in this miniseries on time, and we talked about how do we think of God? And how if we think of God as within the human concept of time, how that limits the power of God. And, you know, what God can or cannot do, is greatly limited by our our understanding of how time flows, right? Or at least the way we think about it, I think Rachael Jackson 51:16 our connection? Yeah, and I think our connection, not again, I'm trying to keep this, I love that you keep bringing it back to God, I'm like, Nah, leave God out of the conversation. Bringing it back to community, and culture and connection, that it's not, right. I think the building can be beautiful. And I think that there can be holiness in the building. But were for those of us that may not have an interventionalist God concept. What was missing is that we weren't next to pitfalls, that the issue wasn't, Oh, I missed seeing the BMR. And then there to me, the eternal light, and I missed being physically in the presence of the Taurus. It was that I didn't hear the other people singing. I didn't, I didn't watch their faces as they prayed and cried, and that was hugged. Ian Binns 52:11 And, yeah, that was a struggle for me with the way we did the Facebook worship, and the way Facebook Live works. Because I cannot see the people, right, you don't see the other people, but then also to one of the struggles that I dealt with. And again, it wasn't the space, it was that, as you said, a community of being together and worshiping as one, right. And so I started really struggling when people would, when it was just me and one other person live, knowing that, you know, people would then tell me, but even you so many people watch the video later, you know, and they take time later, which is something to be appreciative of, but at the same time to it, it was like, right, but I don't feel that community. Like, and there was a it wasn't just about offering it to other people it was also offering it's myself. Right, and so I needed that community, and I at times didn't feel it. And that's nothing against anyone of any of the my fellow church members go, you know, listen, that's nothing against anybody. It was just a recognition of, you know, Zack Jackson 53:17 you know, Rachel, you say that nobody in your context said that they miss seeing the tour miss seeing that. But in my context, in which we are much more concerned with sacred space than sacred time, we, I was recording the services in my dining room for the first six months. And then after Nicole and I kind of parted ways as it were. I started recording services in the sanctuary. And I had dozens and dozens of people tell me how comforting it was, for them to see the stained glass to see the cross to hear the Oregon to, like, see the things in the sanctuary they weren't allowed to be in. And I think about the people who were really excited to be able to just go to the sanctuary, like open sanctuary hours, you can come in and just sit there in the space at any time. And like that was really important for them to connect spiritually, more so than it being on a Sunday morning. Like the time was just like that was just almost accidental. It was like a habit that it was going to be at that time. But the space is what mattered. People found it very hard to worship from their hallway. And Ian Binns 54:31 so I want to make, you know, I want to clarify, sorry to interrupt, I want to clarify something that, you know, I still highly value that space. Right? And so I feel exactly what you're talking about Zach but the very first time that Father Greg, led a service from our church and our sanctuary. Shout out to one of our huge supporters that when the very first time he got one from there during the pandemic, it was a very powerful moment. I remember being very emotional because I could see it again, right? So yes, I have that deep connection to that space. But for me, what I found fascinating, were those who would advocate that the only way they felt they could worship was in that space. Like that was it. And it wasn't about the words, the connection outside of that space at a different time. That was they had to be in that space where they were not actually worshiping. And I struggled with that. Because to me, that seems limiting. Zack Jackson 55:30 The only bit of our worship that is connected to time, specifically to time and not to space is the act of communion, or the Eucharist. It is, by its, by its elements in the way it's constructed in the words that you say, of institution around it. It is a a recreation of an event that happened 2000 Some years ago, that you're bringing into the present, and that you are looking into the future of a final reconciliation, we say the words and communion, all together as one people Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again. And in that way, the act of communion acts as a sort of temporal Axis Mundi to us, you know, big old fancy words. But just like it stakes us in eternity, in that moment, reaching to the past, being in the present, pulling the future towards us. But aside from the act of communion, we are all about space. And we all care about time. So I am, I have learned so much from you, Rachel, today, and I've gleaned so much wisdom from you in this time. As you all didn't struggle the same way we did during the beginning of the pandemic, you struggle in the different ways, but not in the way that we struggled. Rachael Jackson 56:49 Yes, so true. I love I love talking about this stuff. I love our ability to share and find appreciation in our differences and find commonalities. And that we all are seeking to find something sacred, whether that's time or space, whether that's now or eternity. So I appreciate my dialogue. Zack Jackson 57:19 So welcome to a bonus edition of the dead Christian story hour. I think we're going out of order a little bit, but I have one prepared today. And we're not going to ask Rachel to talk more about about something and Ian has something but it's going to save it until the next time because and you'll see why then it's going to be great. So I'm going to go out of order because I have a fun story to share with you today about a dead Christian that I think is great. So our story today takes place in the little community that St. Francis had put together sometime in the early 1200s, late 1100s. Somewhere in there in Assisi in Italy. They were a wild and crazy group of people who left society because they thought it was getting too. Too rich, too wealthy, too disconnected. They were they ran away from their their family's prosperity from all of the wars and all of that stuff that was happening and they went out and they made their own communes out in the middle of the of the woods in the fields. And they lived this peaceful, happy sort of a life and they had some wild stories that are contained in a book called the little flowers of St. Francis. And now like all good hagiography, this takes this you take this with a grain of salt. Because all of our stories about our heroes of faith, a little bit of a comic book, sort of a bend to them. So this story, there was a there was a good fellow named Brother Rufino i Brother affino was in the woods and he was praying fervently. And suddenly, Jesus Christ appears in front of him. He's got the holes in his hands and all that stuff. He's like, look, it's me. It's JC. I'm here to talk to you. And brother finos. Like, wow, what is the great, this is great is the guy this is the guy rose talking about and he's right here. And he's got something to say to me. And so Jesus opens his mouth and says to him, Oh, brother Rufino. Why do you afflict yourself with penance and prayer? Since you are not among those predestined to eternal life, believe me, because I know who might have chosen and predestined and don't believe in that son of Pietro that St. Francis, if he should say the opposite. You know what, don't even ask him about this matter? Because neither he nor others know it, but only I know, because I'm the son of God. Therefore, believe me, you are certainly among the number of the Damned. And the son of Pietro This again is St. Francis As your father, and also his father, they're all damned as well. And whoever follows him as being deceived. Brother Ruffino at this point, he just met Jesus. And Jesus just told him, he's damned to hell. And sorry, dude, that's just the way it goes. And don't tell anyone about this, by the way. So kids, if you're listening out there and a grown up tells you don't tell anyone about this. That's a red flag. So he, he goes off and he's so sad and he's so despondent, and he says, I knew it. I knew it all along. I am an imposter. I really, I don't belong here. Everyone else is so much more righteous than me. And I am damned from the start. But God's like, I saw that. I saw that sneaky thing there. And tell St. Francis, hey, the devil just showed up. It was wearing my clothing, and is pretending to be me. I need you to go talk to brother Rufino. So St. Francis goes to Brother Rufino and he says hey, look, I know what you just saw. That's not Jesus. You can always tell it's Jesus because of the sorts of things he says that's the kind of words that the devil would say, Brother finos, like, wow, really? All right, if you say so. I'm just Dude, you're you're St. Francis. So San Francis says to him, go back out to the woods. And when this imposter Jesus shows up to you again, I want you to say these words to him verbatim. You say, Hey, open your mouth again. And I'm gonna take a minute. And I'm gonna bleep that out. But that is your King James II and translations may say, I shall expel dung upon thee or something like that. But there's a four letter word. So, brother afina, goes out into the woods again. And then, you know, Jesus, the fake Jesus shows up to him again. And because I thought I told you to go home. You are a damned soul. You have no place being here. What on earth are you even doing trying to pray? Stop wasting your time. And brother fino goes, Look, I'm gonna let you finish. But first, open your mouth again. And I'm gonna take a kid in it. And the devil at that point, you just bust out of his Jesus costume. And he's like, wow, you found me. How dare you speak to me like that. And he basically explodes and flies off into the distance and knocks the top of a mountain off. And there's this massive earthquake in like all of the region that everyone reported hearing, and seeing and a huge landslide that came down off of that mountain that other people saw and can attest to and totally definitely happened and was because the devil was so offended by brother Ruffino because he caught him in his in his traps. And that is the story of how brother Ruffino caused an earthquake in a landslide and destroyed the top of a mountain because he talked back to the devil. That's amazing. Okay, very good. 1:03:06 That's it.
Episode 101 Let's talk about reincarnation, end times prophecies, and the shapes of our stories today. Kendra helps us to think deeply about how the shape of time informs the shape of our story and the ways that we make meaning in the universe. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:04 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are Zack Jackson, UCC pastor and Reading Pennsylvania and I am most productive when everyone else is asleep at night, Ian Binns 00:22 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte, my most productive time of the day, sadly varies. Because of my ADD, I cannot pick a particular time and say that's it. It just says that it happens. And when it does I get really frustrated if people get me out of that moment, because it takes hours to get into it. So, yeah, Kendra Holt-Moore 00:51 Kendra Holt, more assistant professor of religion at Bethany College in Lindsborg Kansas. And I used to be able to say, I was most productive at night, because I am a night owl, but the older I get, the more that varies. And I also don't feel like there is a particular time that works best if you just let the Spirit lead. Zack Jackson 01:15 Just tired all the time. Yeah. Kendra Holt-Moore 01:19 Constant exhaustion, and just snippets of bursts of energy. So why high? You ask? Zack Jackson 01:38 I was asking, I was asking it very hard in my head. Anticipating that why, why Kendra answer? Why, why? Kendra Holt-Moore 01:48 Why? Why ever? Why? Well, let me tell you, I have an answer for you. Oh, thank God. So we, we thought that today, we would talk about shapes of time, who. So shapes of time. So just to kind of start out so whenever I teach students, typically it's in like a world religions or an intro to religion class this semester. It was a world religions class, but when I'm having a conversation, in a classroom with students about different, you know, religious traditions, and how, like, what are some of the things that we can compare safely without sort of centralizing religious traditions. And one fun conversation I like to start with somewhere near the beginning of the semester, is to talk about shapes of time. And what I mean by that is, you know, cyclical versus linear conceptions of time, or, you know, some might argue also, like spiral shapes of time. And so the way this looks when I bring it up to my students is I, I typically use for my examples, Hinduism, or Buddhism, and Christianity. And I draw up on the board, just, you know, a simple like circle, and a simple, like, horizontal line, as just like two examples of shapes the circle and this horizontal line. And I talked about how, you know, time is something that we sort of take take for granted, as it's just sort of permeates everything, but we don't, we're not always like thinking about how our understanding of time, you know, like, really impacts us necessarily, or maybe I shouldn't speak for you all, but I don't always think about how time itself is like impacting my day to day, except when I'm trying very hard to get something done. And time is just slipping away that moment, or I become conscious of time, but on a grand scale. It's something that's sort of taken as just the way things are. And the way that we think about time, is I think we kind of it's easy to sort of assume, that are sort of grand notions of time and how time unfolds, that that there's nothing too complicated or like interesting about that necessarily. And, and so when I draw up this like circle and line on the board for my students, one of the conversations that I'm trying to get started is how we across like, religious and cultural traditions, we actually have very different understandings of, of of time. Time and by time I'm not not talking in this moment necessarily about like, scientific like theory of relativity, you know, kind of technical explanations of like space time. But like, cultural and social understandings of like what will happen, what has happened, what is happening and what will happen to us socially and culturally. And, and so, the circle on the board then is what I offer as like a Hindu or Buddhist example of cycles of time with regards to reincarnation and how, you know, the human soul if we're talking about Hinduism, but not not really a soul, if we're talking about Buddhism, but the the person, and the person's existence, moves through a cycle of time that is stuck in this cycle of reincarnation, of, of birth, life, death, rebirth, and that this is, the circle is, is known as samsara, if you're using a Hindu terminology and conceptions of time in samsara, is a cycle that you want to get out of. So samsara is like the way things are, from a Hindu or Buddhist perspective, in terms of thinking about time and how we exist in time, but samsara is not desirable, there are ways that you can build up better karma and be reincarnated in a way that is better or worse, contingent upon, like what kind of karma you built in your current life. But ultimately, the goal in in that version of cyclical time is to get out of the cycle to be released from the cycle. But the cycle can go on and on and on. And you can have, you know, hundreds and hundreds of reincarnations, and there's no like you, you have to there are certain practices and things you have to do in order to be released from the cycle. And, and so, you know, one of the we can put this in the show notes, but there's an article that has like some helpful kind of visuals, but I want to just kind of talk about, like, the way that this cycle of time for Buddhism is represented. And it's the Buddhist wheel of life. And you there are a lot of different I mean, if you just Google that, like, you'll find all kinds of really colorful, vibrant images that come up of this wheel of life. But the wheel of life, you can see like there are different realms, in the Buddhist wheel of life. And those are sort of the possibilities for how you reincarnate into the cycle of samsara. And so you can see like, why now, hopefully, like there's this distinction between like a cycle versus linear time, because there's not, there's not like one specific end goal that is clear to you, from the perspective of your current life, if you have the cyclical notion of time. I mean, yes, like ultimate release from it, you can see that as an end goal, but like the reincarnation cycle, it means that you, you will, again, experience what you have already experienced, you will again, experience birth, which is something that you already have experienced in the past, you will again experience you know, life insofar as you have experienced it, and you know, death will happen again and again. And again, it's not a single kind of destination point until you have achieved the right tools and practices to get out of that cycle. And so you can kind of think about like, how that might inform a person to like navigate through life itself. The other so like the linear line on the board, I uses Christianity, but I think it also applies pretty well to like the Abrahamic traditions in general of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, but I use Christianity in particular, because there's so much that has been written about Christian like apocalyptic. You know, eschatology, which is a fancy word meaning, like, study of in things, or you know, like end of time, and, and another, there are some images that we can also share, I think in the show notes of this version of Christian eschatology called Christian dispensationalism. There are different ways to kind of label this to like you may have heard Christian primo lineal dispensationalism, post millennial dispensationalism, however you slice it, it is a mouthful of a thing to say dispensationalism. But there are images, we can share that kind of show that in this version of Christian eschatology, it's not how everyone sees the end of time. But in this version of Christian eschatology that's popular in, especially some circles of like, Christian, like fundamentalism, types of theology or, you know, like some evangelical theologies, there are seven dispensations of time, and that time moves in a linear fashion. And a dispensation is just like a stage of time, I think that's the way I would describe it more simply because dispensation is also kind of a buzzy word. In this context, but there are, you know, like stages of time, that kind of unfold in this linear fashion, but the point is that we're not moving in a cycle with this conception of time, we're moving towards an end point that is the apocalyptic end of time. And after the end of time, eternity unfolds forever and ever. And it just kind of goes on in this linear, like, one, one way, there's a path a direction, and we move in that direction. And it's kind of inevitable, like, you can't really stop it from unfolding it's going to happen. And, you know, the some of these dispensations for Christian dispensationalism you have, like, the age of innocence, and that's, like, you know, Adam and Eve, you have you go up through like, 234567. But if the, I mean, I could like list all of those, but I'm, kind of move quickly. I'm timing myself this time, so that I'm not going like way over. Zack Jackson 11:59 So it's like innocence. No innocence. Gods here, Gods there. Now it's Israel. Now. It's now it's Jesus. Now it's Yeah, yeah. Yeah, it's also inherently kind of anti semitic. Yeah, in that dispensationalism, leaves Jews behind, but go on. Kendra Holt-Moore 12:17 So yeah, you have like innocence, stage one, stage two conscience, stage three, human government, stage four, promise, stage five, loss, stage six, Grace, stage seven kingdom age. And there are, you know, specific things that happen in each of those stages that kind of map on to biblical stories, and the stages that map on to like the time of Moses, and, um, you know, just like the time of Abraham. And all of these stages as they unfold, it's like, sort of this like, progression of like God's plan for time. And the way that that ends, is with this seventh dispensation, the kingdom age where Jesus returns and rains on Earth for 1000 years, and, you know, brings peace, and, you know, after that time is kind of over, there's like the final judgment, the white throne judgment, and then time ends and eternity begins. And that, that's kind of the the ending of this, like premillennial dispensationalist. Christian theology again, sorry, for the long buzzy terminology. But the point is that this version of time, is, is is different, like it's, it has that linear shape to it. And one of the things that I think is kind of interesting about this understanding of time, and it's, there's this like piece of inevitability. And it's not the only version of like, like, this is, I think, kind of a common kind of trope in like apocalyptic literature and thought is like, the apocalypse is coming, eventually, like, it's inevitable. And that means that you can't fight it and in some ways, believing in the inevitability of the apocalyptic moment of end of time can make some people sort of lean into that and welcome that end of time moment, if it means that the there sort of conception of time will actually like, ultimately benefit them. So for example, in like this Christian dispensationalist, Premillennialism version of the entire time. Christians who hold this, believe that they'll be gone there'll be sort of taken away by God out of out of the earth out of time so that they don't have to experience the violence and trauma of the apocalypse at Self, and that they will be, you know, held close, near and dear and safe with God and protected from the end of times. And so what this means is you have Christians who hold to this kind of eschatology are, I think more likely to say things like, well, let's just like let it all burn, because we're not going to be here anyway, like, only the unsaved will be sort of judged and condemned, but you know, Christians will be safe. So any violence that happens ultimately, it's, it's not going to affect us in the end and this kind of eternal way. And, and so I think the kind of extreme response through that kind of lens of time is, it can doesn't always have to, but it can lend itself to apathy, and even like a condoning of, you know, destruction and violence. And this is me sort of using that as an example, because there was actually an article that was published very recently in the Atlantic about this language like cautioning against the language of a new civil war that's like impending in the United States. And that the whole article is pretty interesting. But there's this line that caught my eye. And it says, you know, a several paragraphs down. And I'll just kind of like read the couple of sentences for free all that says, quote, There is a very deep strain of apocalyptic fantasy in fundamentalist Christianity, Armageddon may be horrible, but it is not to be feared because it will be the harbinger of eternal bliss for the elect and eternal damnation for their foes, on what used to be referred to as the far right, that perhaps should now simply be called the armed wing of the Republican Party. The imminence of Civil War is a given and quote, and, and that caught my eye because it's really talking about a shape of time. And, you know, like, the question that kind of arises from that, for me is like, what, what are practical implications in our behavior? When we think about, like, what our own shapes of time are? Do we have notions that lead us to an inevitable end? Is that something that we experienced over and over again? And like, is that just sort of philosophy or theological pondering? Or does that kind of impact us on this, like, deep on the ground level? And, and so that, that was, that was kind of where, where my mind was going, when I think about this, the shape of time? That's kind of why I have to start us here. No, well, Ian Binns 18:09 says while you were talking about it, especially the last part, and I mean, y'all know, I don't have the theological background that you guys do. So a lot of times the words that are used in cotton, what are you talking about, but they may me just all of a sudden just reminded me of the Left Behind series? Yes, that was written the book series, right. And so Kendra Holt-Moore 18:31 that is a great example, and that you have given us and reminded us that is Christian premillennial dispensationalism. Yeah. So now, translation, aka left behind, Ian Binns 18:43 right, well, and I find it fascinating. So what's interesting is that I actually got into Reading this series in like 2000, it was when I was in the Peace Corps. And so when I was in the Peace Corps in Jamaica, and the main office in Kingston, I was had a library that we could go and just get books from and blah, blah, take with us back to our home and everything and and so I think that was the time I started getting into this series, because I saw it and I was calling God sounds kind of interesting. And so I started Reading it. And I was not very strong in my faith. Want to take that back. That's actually when I first started a Bible study, but it was a different time in my life, right? So I was 23 years old, 2223 different time of my life, different things going on. And I now that I looked it up, and just looked up left behind again to remind myself some of it and I'll be honest, I did not finish this series because I found it to be this is just my opinion. Some of the writing you know, again, I was not familiar with the language, the terminology that was being used and the description that you just provided Kendra, but there were parts of the books I found as I was going further for the series that I would skip hold sections because it felt like it was Reading the same thing I read in the book before, right? Like these long sermons from a character or whatever. And so it but I, I'm curious how would I approach the series now at this point in my life and at this point in my spiritual journey, right and starting to have a better understanding of time and just religion in general and what the underlying me I mean, I get what the meaning was, but like, talk about dismiss, dismiss, what is the word again? dispensationalism. Zack Jackson 20:33 There you go. That word can you can approach that book series straight into the recycling bin if you'd like. Yeah, Ian Binns 20:38 I don't think we have them anymore. I think like I ended up buying several of them and got rid of them. Zack Jackson 20:42 That's Yes, pre trim these Corinne. Aspen's pre trib, premillennial dispensationalism is what that is essentially, with the millennial in the millennial and the pre millennial post millennial mid millennial that has to do with in Revelation talks about how there will be 1000 year reign of Christ. Before then Satan is allowed to return cause havoc, and then the final judgment. And so then the thought is the question is, when does that happen? So the pre millennial is that that hasn't happened yet. And that there will be this great time and then there'll be blah, blah, blah, then there's post millennial that's like, hey, no, that's where we are. Right now that this this kingdom age? Is is the millennial reign of Christ that the the age of the church or maybe that we're almost there. And then the trim part of that is not the trip. Yeah, the is the trick Great Tribulation, as in tribulation, right? The seven year tribulation that is foretold in Daniel and in Revelation. And at what point would the people of God be raptured out of it, so that only the unrighteous should suffer? There's some interpretations that Oh, before the tribulation, all the elect will be taken out. And that's what left behind is, there's some thought that it's midway through taken from a couple of phrases from Daniel, and then there's some that everyone will have to live through the whole thing only until the end, will then there'll be judgment on it all. And I mean, I was steeped in this stuff, my seventh grade Bible teacher had a timeline on the wall of the n times, with like, how many months in between events would happen, you know, the, the two witnesses would show up here, one of them would die, and then they'd raise and then there'd be, you know, the Antichrist would rise and he would have a mortal wound, and then he'd be healed. And then he'd be like, all along the way. We knew what the mark of the beast was going to be. And when it was going to happen, it was actually supposed to start happening on y2k. But then apparently, enough, people prayed and God delayed God's hand. Or so that's what they told me when it didn't happen. But it's, it's ironic to me that this group of people has latched on to second temple apocalyptic literature, which is this period of time, it's like a 300 year period, during the Second Temple of Jerusalem, where this genre starts to arise. They've taken that and applied it directly to this sort of straight line timeline that you're talking about Kendra, that, you know, this thing hasn't happened yet. But here are the signs to know when it's going to happen and what it's going to look like. And that goes from A to B to C to D onward until the end, it's a straight line. When that is the exact opposite of the way that second temple apocalyptic literature is written and met to be read. If you look at Daniel and parts of Jesus's little Apocalypse on the on the mountain and and the book of Revelation, and you know, all of the ones that didn't make it into the the Hebrew and Christian canons, they're all using coded language for things that are happening in the moment. Now, there's a great, great part in Daniel, in which they're talking about kings of the north, and kings of the south and marriages that between them and wars between them. And it's very clearly talking about the battles between the Seleucids and the Ptolemies. And like, historically, we know this, this is lining up exactly what it is until the desolation of the abomination of desolation. And then there's a straight war and then God comes down with his angels and saves the day. Which we know didn't happen, at least not in any kind of final sort of a way. So then, what do you do with that? Well, that's how all of them are written. They're all written with this great symbolism of things of awful apocalyptic sort of images. And, in the end Godwin's, and I say apocalyptic that word means to reveal to pull back the curtain. And so what that whole genre is doing is it says hey, You see these things happening in real life, but I'm going to pull back the curtain and show you the spiritual realities behind them. So you think Rome is this unstoppable force, but hey, pull back the curtain, and it's actually just this ugly dragon. And the ugly Dragon is going to be thrown into the pit of fire. So these books were meant to be read by people who are currently suffering, so that they can put themselves in the story. And then see that in the end, God rescues them. So in a way, second temple apocalyptic literature is like a green screen, in which generation upon generation upon generation can stand in front of it and put themselves in the story. So the, the beast from Revelation is originally Nero. And then, you know, it might be Domitian. And then it might be valerian. And then it might be Stalin, you know, like, you can put you can make the beast, any number of things, as it has been, I mean, Martin Luther said, that was the pope at one point. And, you know, for all intents and purposes, for him, it was, because that's the point is these, these, these prophetic visions are cycles of things that they're true because they keep happening. And then the point is, you get to put yourself in it, and then you get to see that God is faithful, and that you'll be brought through it at the end. And so to take that kind of genre of literature, and then to take that, that circle down that spiral, and to just stretch it out and say, All right, this is what it means. This is the start. And the end of the end times is just a It's such, it's so dishonest, and disingenuous. And it's it. It does violence to the Scriptures themselves. Kendra Holt-Moore 26:54 It also sounds a little bit like, I don't know if you necessarily intended it this way back, but like the, it seems like people when they're in the moment, especially with this dislike genre of like apocalyptic literature, being in it. The those like apocalyptic tropes, like they, it feels linear, because it's like, the cycle that you are experiencing, but you don't see it as a cycle. And, you know, obviously, like we've kind of used the premillennial left behind type eschatology is that but like, the, it's kind of easier to identify the genre of literature as a cycle, if you're sort of using hindsight to see that this happens again, and again, and again. Is that Is that how you would characterize Zack Jackson 27:48 that's a really good insight there. It doesn't feel like a cycle while you're in it. But I think that's the power of once you realize that it is. So then, you know, everything looks bleak right now in the world. It does. And it seems like the cups, the bowls of judgment are being poured out upon us all. So then to be able to keep turning through the book of Revelation to get to the part where death itself, hell itself is thrown into the pit of fire and destroyed. And then every knee boughs and every tongue confesses, and all things are made new, and there's streams of living water and to be able to get to that point. Is there some some comfort in that? Ian Binns 28:35 Well, it seems like in and I want to go back to that series for a minute. That's right, the Left Behind series that, you know, you talked about zakat being kind of a way, he's I think this is what you were saying a way of it, almost, you know, it seems to me to the way it was written was to help people relate to it, right, and then see that there'll be saved at the end and those types of things. And that's a very generalization, overgeneralization, I guess. But it's interesting while Reading more about the series, the efforts to turn them into films, and how they keep trying to reboot it. And they're actually in the process of doing that now, of redoing the series again, to see if that gets get more attention to it, I guess, and to get more people on board, this particular series, I just find that fascinating of what it is they seem to be trying to do, and I'm part of that part of me will be curious to see how will they try to connect or will they tried to connect it politically? Right in some way that you know, I saw I remember in 2011, or something, I guess it was when Obama was running the second time. I think that was right. Yeah. Chuck Norris and his wife came out talking about that election and that proclaim that if Obama won reelection, it would begin the 1000 years of darkness Oh, yeah. Kendra Holt-Moore 30:07 This is a political strategy because it works because it's drama. And it's like, you know, the religious affiliation of these stories. They're all encompassing, and it just moves people. And ah, yes, yes. The fact Zack Jackson 30:24 that people think that this is the worst that humanity has ever been blows my mind like, have you read history? We used to murder people for sport. We're not. Yeah, there's not so bad things are not as bad as you think they are. Ian Binns 30:39 Yeah. But it's just fascinating how they, they, you know, a percentage of the population kind of latches on to that messaging. And they're a powerful group of people, because especially when you talk about politics, you know, they vote, you know, you get them to vote. And that's how a lot of times, some of the bigger elections they win is because people know that if we can get the more fundamentalist, Christian and evangelical Christians out to vote that most likely they'll vote for the Republican candidate. And, you know, they go out numbers that can help. And so by tying in that argument that they use obviously didn't work because Obama won a second term. But I just found that so interesting that that was a perspective they were trying to use as a way to encourage people to vote is if you don't vote, if you don't vote for Romney, then the 1000 years of darkness will again, Zack Jackson 31:37 evangelicals going if you don't vote for the Mormon, then that's outside years of darkness. Right? Which, you know, that's not a personal knock against Mormons, but just the those same evangelicals would not consider a Mormon, a Christian normally. But how do you come back from that, by the way, like, once you've gone totally nuclear, that the world is going to end and Satan himself will reign if this man gets elected? Like, how do you then say something about someone else? Like there's no higher? You can't go higher than that you've already gone nuclear. So Kendra Holt-Moore 32:16 worse than the Antichrist, right? Ian Binns 32:18 What do we do? Yeah, it's just seems like such an interesting way to live. And as I said, in fact, they're trying to redo this series again. And they're using the actor Kevin Sorbo. Who did, Hercules, right. No, Zack Jackson 32:37 yes. And then every low budget Christian movie since then. Ian Binns 32:41 Yep. And so and he is someone the right has, you know, latched on to and he that's he's found his niche. And so he's gonna star and direct in the new movie, I will only Zack Jackson 32:52 watch it if Lucy Lawless is in it, as well as Xena Warrior Princess, not as anyone else. Ian Binns 33:00 Yeah. Doubtful. It'll happen without Zack Jackson 33:03 a man can dream. Ian Binns 33:15 This right, anyway, sorry. I know, I keep going on tangent. But I just found fascinating. Kendra Holt-Moore 33:19 I didn't know that I didn't realize that they were trying to like reboot the Ian Binns 33:24 and this is from last month. Hmm. Kendra Holt-Moore 33:27 Okay. Well, there you go. So I was, you know, talking, talking through this, you know, the shape shapes of time. And, you know, I kind of our plan for today's recording with my husband, Chad. And he told me of a helpful kind of connection that might be familiar to, to many of you, but there is a piece Well, first of all, there's a writer, he was an American writer, Kurt Vonnegut, who recorded I think it was kind of like a short lecture, but also published in several places about his early writing his like, I think it was his thesis on the shapes of stories. And so I just, I think that's a really interesting kind of connection here, as we're talking about the shapes of time. Like, are we really just talking about the shapes of stories, and Kurt Vonnegut had this whole sort of, like, charting out of different shapes of stories. And so, you know, he was like, writing and publishing has like a lot of novels and was thinking about, like, the structure of a narrative. And I think you can find, you know, his, his lecture online. I think it's like a 30 minute piece, but, you know, he talks through how, you know, when you're talking about like, any kind of job of story, there's like this stair step ladder where you're climbing upward things are going swimmingly. You know, the lovers, they fall in love, and they're like having a grand time. And they're, you know, giving each other flowers and walking, holding hands through the park. And, and then something happens. And this stair step ladder going upwards, suddenly crashes into a, you know, a desolate trough. And that trough, there's this low point, and then you have a low point that requires a creative solution, and then you start moving up on the incline again, and you know, maybe it flattens out, there's a plateau. And then maybe there's like another, a deeper crash, a deeper trough. And then the end of the story can maybe resolve coming again, out of the trough back up into an incline, that just keeps going up and up and up, and you have like your happy ending. And you know, I'm doing some heavy like paraphrasing of this shapes of stories, not something I had seen of his before. But like the point being that you can draw on like the same way that in my classes I draw like the circle and horizontal line to represent time qurbana gets it there's like a bunch of different shapes that you can put up on the board, variations of these shapes to you can have this staircase that goes up and then crashes down and then rises back up again, you can have something that looks more like a wave that bounces up and down, and up and down, and up and down, and up and down and just has, you know, twists and turns. And you can have a story that's just maybe it is a single horizontal line. And it's maybe a boring story where there's just nothing happens. And it's just plateau from beginning to end. And I you know, there are like shapes of stories that we are drawn to, and why are we drawn to those stories? Why would we prefer a story that has the, you know, peaks and valleys versus a story that's just a flat plateau all the way through? Is there you know, an excitement that comes with different shapes of stories? And like, why do we crave certain kinds of resolution at the end of a story. And it just is like, I think a really interesting and kind of perfect, like frame that Vonnegut's sort of offered that I think really maps on to the way that we think about these like big conceptions of time out of our cultural religious lenses, and that it seems that we, like we crave order, we crave orderliness. In the midst of you know, seeming chaos, that we want to feel like we have control, we want to feel a sense of meaning. And, and so, you know, I think like one way to sort of put put these shapes of time or shapes of stories and bring them together is that that's part of what's being offered to us. And you know, for better or worse, because the shapes are different. And they mean different things to different people. But I think the motivation of latching on to certain stories, is that sort of comfort that and like sense of belonging that we derive from particular shapes. So I don't know. I'm curious what what y'all think about that? Zack Jackson 38:39 Yeah, reminds me of the end of the gospel of Mark. Which, yeah, Mark was written in the style of a Greek epic, which they don't all have perfect, happy endings. And the earliest manuscripts, it ends with, you know, the, the women come to the tomb, they find that it's, it's empty. There's, there's an angel who's like, Hey, check it out. He's not here. He's gone. He risen Hallelujah. And it ends with Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone because they were afraid. And that's how the book ends. But that only lasted like a couple 100 years, because then people added on to the end of it. And so all of the later manuscripts and like the ones that are like King James is based on the Latin Bibles, they all have this other lesson versus that's all like wrapping up the story, you know, the, like the end of the Lord of the Rings, where it's like, alright, well, then he appeared to two more of them. And then he appeared to everyone. And then he said, Go into all the world and preach the gospel. And then he said, I love you. I'm happy. I'll see you later. I left lunch in the fridge and everything got wrapped up in the end, and it was like they could not stand for the story tonight. And on a high note that it had to end there, or else they just felt weird about it. Kendra Holt-Moore 40:07 I love that as an example, because it's like you go from a story shape that kind of trails off at the end and this sad sort of dangling like downward slope of trembling and fear to like the sharp upward incline of happiness and resolution, very different, very different emotional responses to Zack Jackson 40:27 the last chapter of Ecclesiastes does the same thing. Where it's like some some later editor was like, this is just this needs, this needs a pick me up at the end, nobody's ever people are going to finish this and just be upset. So we need like, a happy ending, tacked on to the end of the bow on it. Right. And then they did the same thing to I Am Legend. Anybody ever see that? The book, the short story ends totally differently. It ends with this great like Twilight Zone esque reveal. And it's like dark, and it just ends. But Hollywood was like we can't do that we have to have a resolution, we have to have some kind of happy ending, people have to leave the theater feeling good in some way, shape, or form. Like they didn't just Well, anytime Ian Binns 41:14 you think about with storytelling, you know, as we've already said, that having that nice ending is what people human nature is what we want, right? We want to build a wrap up something type deal. And so, you know, John, my son, John and I are right now watching the Marvel Cinematic Universe, then release order. And so he came, you know, maybe a month or so ago, he was just like, Hey, Dad, I really want to my friend watched Black Widow, I want to see Black Widow. And I said, Okay, that's great, but we're not seeing the others. It's not gonna make you're gonna miss some things. Oh, yeah. So what are you ready to start watching these? And he's like, oh, yeah, absolutely. So we started and we're watching an order of release, not chronological order. And so it makes me think about, you know, he and I were talking the other day, and yesterday, he was kind of trying to make sense of how they're all connected. We've gotten all the way through phase two, we just started Civil War last night. Captain America Civil War, right. And it makes he was talking about how they're all connected and stuff like that. But are they really like Captain America? The second one is really a sequel and what that means and, you know, part one, part two, and it made me think about Avengers. The third and fourth one, right. So Infinity War the way it ends, and then you have in game and and it was kind of pitched as a part one, part two aspect of things because Part One does not end. All happy go lucky as part two does at least the ends were things more wrapped up part one ends with a major cliffhanger. Right. And you think about films like that, like, for example, the last two Harry Potter movies, the four books seven. You know, they're both the Deathly Hallows, but it was part one, part two, part one did not end on a high note as part two debt. And so it ended with something that you're just kind of like, well, what and so but you knew it Part Two was comment. So the story wasn't over yet. Is my point. Right? And we love it for the story to be over and happy, as you said, and I think the two examples you gave from Scripture is just fascinating. I was not quite aware that they did that with Ecclesiastes, but I didn't know that. That's how Mark changed is that here was the original version, then they added on some things too, which I've always found really interesting. And to me, that was take that as a what does that say about the Bible? Right, you know, and those types of things, but anyway, Zack Jackson 43:51 most people want to believe that things are gonna work out well for them. And when we are in a storyline, we put ourselves in that story. And we, you know, we then want the characters to come out on top, you know, unless you are a person who is just super pessimistic, you know, you know, somebody like, like, I don't know, Adam, who picked out Pan's Labyrinth for his movie early last year. And that movie ends spoiler alert, with like, a dead child. And yeah, it's like, oh, that's an awful ending. You know, something like Requiem for a Dream that just ends with awful tragedy. Some people like that, and I don't know why. Honestly. Kendra Holt-Moore 44:47 I think it's like I think some, some of those stories can be really cathartic. Like, it's not that they're happy, but they reflect Something that you experience. And I think, like the cathartic experience of watching something that's super, super sad. I think what that gives people to some extent is a feeling that you're not alone and experiencing like deep sadness or trauma and that there's like a path. I mean, I guess if the story ends in, you know, death, I'm not sure that that maybe is a different message. But some of the stories that are really sad, there's still kind of a way forward through healing. And healing is really hard. And not, you know, it's not like a simple, straightforward, like, wrapped up in a bow type of process. And it's just, I think there's something that's comforting in seeing that being reflected in all its like ugliness and darkness, that kind of counter intuitively facilitates a kind of healing or a feeling of being seen. But that's a very different kind of story that I think then, you know, what we've been talking about with the sort of nice resolution that is happy, but it's, yeah, it's a different shape, with a different kind of purpose, I think. And then there's also the kind of, you know, like, storytelling problem, where people don't want the story to end. And so the story just like drags on and on and like, you think of like, a TV show that is, like, 10 seasons too long. And it's like, why didn't you just have a plan to do this? Well, in three seasons, phrase, and on and on, and on, and on, and on, and on and on. Ian Binns 46:46 We gave that up a long time ago. Kendra Holt-Moore 46:50 But yeah, like, Why, what's the kind of motivation of that shape, and I think it's, it's like, related to the desire to want things to work out well, in the end. But I think people also want to keep experiencing that, that like, happy moment or resolution until, like, feel part of a story for as long as possible. When, you know, really, like all stories, they do come to an end or they at least change over time. And so there's like, I think, I think we all kind of have an impulse or like motivation to find like permanence in like goodness, or permanence and like stability. And that can like influence the way that we tell stories and sort of drag them on in hopes that we can be part of them for for longer Ian Binns 47:54 well, and so if I can we talk about in the feeling of happiness, and just feeling good, you know, John and I, in this journey of Washington, these films together and we're having a great time doing it, you know, I mean, he's really getting into it, and we're having a lot of fun. But I remember sometimes he would talk to me about what was your favorite one and your least favorite and Babalon and I had told him that you know, we're not done with civil war yet. We're gonna finish it today. But that when I saw that film, I didn't want to watch it again. Like that even though you know the way it ends it's okay, it was still a you know, for two for what over 12 films or something like that so far up to that point. It's like all the heroes maybe they don't get along at times but they're still kind of on the same side and then all of a sudden you see in this one that wait a minute to the biggest characters are now on opposite sides fighting each other. And I struggled with that I gotta be honest watching that that was tough to watch because it made me sad and like oh, this is something I'm supposed to be able to just escape into and not worry and bola and all sudden this happens and and so that was tough. And so I like how they work with it later. But that is interesting to me. How you know so watching some of it last night I'm glad we're doing it. But even he was describing this morning so what do you think so far? And he's like, I like it. But I mean it's it's really good and the plots interesting but also don't like it because we've not gotten to the big fight yet. We stopped bright for that. And we had to because bedtime fight we had we'd have to watch the rest of the film. Right and so as I said, we'll finish it today. But he just was like, but I don't like the fact that they're they're starting to not really get along because he you know, we both love Iron Man and Captain America alright, and we just but all these characters you get attached to all of them. And so it's just interesting. What that how this all relates Hmm. So Zack Jackson 50:01 yeah, superhero movies in general, kind of have the same shape as the New Testament. Where it's like, yeah. Which is like he does the shaped Zack. I will, I will paint you a picture auditorially Yes, please. So it begins, they all begin with humble origins, an underdog story of somebody with great promise and potential, who needs to go through a hero's journey in order to find their full potential. They discover their powers, they go up against the powers that be there's some some small successes, there's some small losses. And then there's the final, there's the big confrontation in which they lose. They always have to lose at least somewhat. They need to be beaten into the ground. You know, oh, no, Iron Man is falling out of the sky, because he's all frozen. And you know, Captain America shield is broken like that. You need to be broken in some way. But then, when all hope seems last look on the horizon. And there's no, no, that's Gandalf coming over helm steep, but I was really good to the same kind of deal, right? Then there's this dramatic resurrection. And then boom, there we are. There's the happy ending that death is no more Oh, oh, Death, where is thy staying? Oh, grave, where's the victory? You know that, how we have this final win. And then then the same cycle repeats again, with the early church and the book of Acts. And then we get through these letters. And then the book of Revelation does the exact same story arc of like this humble beginnings, and then these troughs, and then at the end, there's this great victory, and it always ends on a happy note. And all of the stories in the New Testament follow that same underdog hero's journey, sort of story arc. Kendra Holt-Moore 52:09 Shapes, Zack Jackson 52:10 which is maybe why, maybe why I like superhero movies? I don't know. Yeah, it all Kendra Holt-Moore 52:15 comes together. Ian Binns 52:18 It makes you think about the matrix as well. Right? We're recording this. So less than a week before the fourth Matrix film comes out matrix resurrections. And I think that's gonna be really interesting. I'm actually excited about I really liked the series there had issues with the second and third movie. But I still liked the storyline, and the, you know, what it stood for, and stuff I thought was very interesting. But that's kind of like a superhero. Movie, or series as you just described, right. Um, and also even like the, with Star Wars, and the three separate trilogies. Yeah. Right. They help kind of follow that same, same description that you just gave us about superhero movies. And so yeah, I think it's gonna be very interesting, how they, how they bring all that together in this fourth movie of the matrix. Series. I don't know Kendra Holt-Moore 53:13 beaking of shapes and superheroes in the Bible. Zack, do you want to tell us about a dead Christian story our How's that for a transition? Zack Jackson 53:34 That is a wonderful transition. Because I still don't have a theme song. Kendra Holt-Moore 53:43 Tried it? Let's try to workshop that. Okay. Did Christian Story Hour? Do you want something spooky? Um, or like uplifting? Or like Halloween theme music type of you know, intro I don't know. I'm Ian Binns 53:58 gonna make me believe Zack Jackson 54:00 I'm kind of I'm kind of I'm kind of into the the sort of ironic theme music something chipper and cheery like a like a, like a Mattress Company jingle. Kendra Holt-Moore 54:16 Oh, yeah, that's perfect. Zack Jackson 54:18 You got 805 80 to 300 M Pa. That kind of Well, welcome to part two of the dead Christian story our a part at the end of every fifth episode, in which I share with you one of my favorite stories from Christian hagiography. What is hagiography you ask? Well, I'll tell you. These are stories of dead Christians. And they are most of the time totally over the top. And I want you to take all of these with a giant grain of salt because they are not historically accurate and they aren't meant to be They are stories of heroes. And so that's what they're just meant to be. So just let them be hero stories, okay, and stop thinking too much about it because it's great. And I love them. This one comes from St. Lawrence. And St. Lawrence is the name of the borough where I live, which is named not at all after the actual St. Lawrence, but after a brand of stockings that the local knitting mill made in the 40s. But St. Lawrence, capitalism, right, it's too bad, because it's a great story. And I actually, this is the only dead Christian. That whose icon I own, I have, I have St. Lawrence in my kitchen, he holds my, my coffee scoops. And I'll tell you why in just a second, because it's great. So I'm going to take you all the way back to the mid to 50s. So this is like 200 years after Jesus. And Christianity is still kind of an underground sort of deal. But Christians in Rome, were starting to get maybe a little bit too powerful, a little bit too influential. You know, the whole thing was just kind of like back to Emperor valerian, he wasn't really having a whole lot of these Christians. So he issued an edict that all Christians in Rome must offer a sacrifice to Roman gods, or else lose their titles and land and standing. And anyone who persisted should be put to death. This was something that Roman emperors did from time to time, because they knew that Christians weren't going to do it, because Christians were stubborn. And they were in those days, kind of countercultural. pacifistic, anarchists, who loved to give the middle finger to the government. If you can imagine such a thing, that's what the church was like back then. And they were not, under any circumstance going to acknowledge of Roman God as any kind of God because they were like, it's Jesus, or nothing. Sorry, I'll die before I'll do that. And so the Romans were like, Great, then we'll kill you. So in 258, the Emperor valerian issued an edict that all of the bishops, priests and deacons of the Roman church should immediately be put to death, and all of their treasures confiscated because obviously, they would not make those sacrifices to Jupiter and such. So they started hunting down all the church leaders. And after they killed the Pope, and some of the most prominent leaders, their prefect of Rome, went after the arch deacon of the church, and demanded that he turn over all the treasures of the church. Now, deacons, for those of you who are not super into churchy stuff are the class of, of officers within the church who are tasked with feeding and taking care of the poor and the widows, the orphans, the lepers, anyone who has who has no social safety net in society. The deacons were the ones who went out and found these people and took care of them and help them so indirectly, they're also the people in charge of whatever finances the church has, which at those times was not a whole lot. But that was their job. And this fella named Lawrence was the first Deacon appointed of this church, and he was kind of in charge. So the Roman prefect went to him. And they were like, hey, Lawrence, so I gotta kill you. And I'm sorry about that, but I got to do it. However, if you turn over all of the treasures of the church to me right now, I might give you a head start. So you can get out of dodge, right? Because the prefect wants to take a cut, before he gives the rest of the Emperor. So he's, you know, he's trying to make it a little sweet for himself. So Lawrence is like, Alright, sure, I'm in, give me three days. At this point. I'm sure the prefect is like wait a second. What are these Christians? They're they're jackasses. So what, why is why is this guy on board, but whatever, I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna think too hard about it. I'm gonna get some cash money. So three days later, Lawrence shows up in front of the prefix office. And trailing him is a crowd of the dirtiest people, the widows, the orphans, the lepers, the poor, the crippled the sick, following behind him in this crowd, and he says to the prefect, Behold, the treasures of the church. Yeah, because he had taken those three days and had liquidated all of the church's assets and had then just redistributed them to the poor in Rome. So the church had no money after that. And he said, we are far more wealthy than your Emperor will ever be. So as you can probably Guess the prefect was not a fan. And so instead of beheading him, as they did with the Pope, and everyone else, he's like, I'm gonna make this guy suffer. So we strapped them to a grid iron, and put him over a bed of hot coals to slowly cook him to death. And after a while of excruciating pain, he said to Lawrence, what do you have to say for yourself now? And Lawrence looked at him, and he said, I'm done on this side, turn me over. And for that, they made him the patron saint of cooks. And so the icon I have of him in my kitchen is of him happily standing there with this big smile on his face, holding a big gridiron with like a bunch of garlic and onions in his other hand, as if he was like the church chef, because he's the patron saint of cooks. And somebody told the icon maker, go ahead and make me a picture of St. Lawrence, the patron saint of cooks. And they're like, Yeah, sure, I'll give him a bunch of food and stuff. Because apparently he was a chef. He was not a chef. He was cooked alive on a gridiron. He is also the patron saint of comedians, which feels a lot more appropriate. Because dude was a smartass. And I kind of love him. Ian Binns 1:01:24 The patron saint of chefs, even though he was cooked alive. Zack Jackson 1:01:28 Yeah, the patron saint of dentists also got her teeth kicked out. So the people who come up with these things have a sort of sense of cruel irony, I think. Yeah, Kendra Holt-Moore 1:01:37 very much. So Ian Binns 1:01:38 I would say so. Yeah. I love that. Kendra Holt-Moore 1:01:41 Is there a like a closing like, outgoing theme music that that we'll have for the fit too, because I feel like it really needs that. Oh, Ian Binns 1:01:51 well, maybe something about magical breasts this time though. Zack Jackson 1:01:55 No magical breast this time. Just a smart Aliki Deacon who got cooked alive and then later turned into the patron saint of yummy garlic and onions. Ian Binns 1:02:08 Yeah, that was, yeah, amen. Zack Jackson 1:02:12 Amen. Okay. So the next time you're having a barbecue, pour one out for St. Lawrence, and maybe give the middle finger to the government hits what he was with St. Ian Binns 1:02:24 Lawrence for being cooked alive. Hey, go. Thank you.
Episode 100 Episode number 100! Can you believe it?! It seems like only yesterday, we were nervously launching this podcast, wondering if anyone would listen, and here we are with 51,000 downloads, dozens of incredible guests, and so much more planned for 2022 and beyond. Thank you all for your incredible support. You are truly the best community on the internet. To celebrate this momentous occasion, we took some time to share our favorite recent facts, stories, and learnings. So if you want to learn about forests in the sky, insect superhighways, Olympic achievements, heartfelt wisdom, how to forgive, the clams who control Warsaw's water supply, and that time that Pepsi briefly became the 6th biggest military in the world, then you're in the right place. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:05 You are listening to the Down the wormhole podcast, exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This is our 100th episode. Oh Ray, which is why we're doing it live and not pre recorded. I mean, it's always done live. But you know what I mean, that clip of me at the beginning, which is why it's so unpolished here at the beginning, but it's our 100th episode, and we're super excited. And we're doing something totally different today. So everyone, just say your name as fast as possible at the same time, okay. Hurray, well, so after 100 episodes, hopefully you know who we are at this point. Today is going to be totally different instead of taking a topic and going into it, we are all coming here today with a fun fact or story or something that has filled our hearts with joy or wonder in the past. I don't know, I was gonna say in the past couple of months, but time makes no sense. In the world of COVID We have all been living in a wormhole for the past two years or maybe 12 years or who knows. So. So does anybody want to start? Or? Or do you want me to start? Ian Binns 01:27 Kendra razor 01:28 Andrew wants to start, Kendra Holt-Moore 01:28 I can start. But if you want to start back then No, go ahead. Just anything. Zack Jackson 01:35 Tell me go ahead Rachael Jackson 01:37 and wait, go ahead needles here. Zack Jackson 01:40 What happens when we don't schedule, Kendra Holt-Moore 01:43 I am really excited to share this because I I love Radiolab it's my other one of my favorite podcasts. And I recently learned on one of their recent episodes, that a scientist for years have been, you know, in the forest, they pay a lot of attention to like what's happening on the forest floor. And for many years, scientists didn't like put in a lot of effort, or they just didn't think that it was as important to be observing, studying what's happening up in the canopy of the trees. And, you know, in in recent years, like, there's a lot more stuff that you can like, read about and, you know, we know more about the canopy of trees, but scientists were like, you know, we were we're on the ground, we're closer to the dirt and the roots and the trunks. And so that's where a lot of that like early work was taking place. But I learned in this episode that there is a scientist, I can't remember her name, but she basically was one of the first people to discover that there is there are trees that grow in the canopy of trees. It's not turtles all the way down, it's trees all the way up. Zack Jackson 03:08 There are trees growing in. Kendra Holt-Moore 03:11 And, and that's how Radiolab put it up, not turtles all the way down, but trees all the way up. And I really love that I was thinking it's also kind of like the men and black conclusion of the world inside of a marble, or the Dr. Seuss story of a dandelion that has like a world living inside of the dandelion. Like we're just, you know, it's it's a great alternative of like the multiple worlds hypothesis. There's just trees living in their own ecosystem in the canopy of the forest, because there's dirt that gets trapped up in the canopy, like in between, like tree branches. And so one of the scientists she had proposed, I think it was for her dissertation to, to do work until like study the canopy. And her advisors were like, Okay, if you want to do that fine, but they weren't like super excited about it. And so she started, you know, doing her fieldwork and would climb up into the trees. And the first time that she noticed this, like other ecosystem in the canopy, she like was able to reach her hand into dirt up in the canopy, like she's up off the ground, but putting her hand in dirt. That was like putting your hand in dirt that's down on the literal ground. And I just think that is so cool. I didn't know that maybe maybe y'all are more informed about tree canopies than I am but I just found that to be a really cool thing because especially if you think about like really dense, dense like tropical forests where you you can't actually see what's going on up at the canopy like you have to, you have to go up in it to get perspective So it makes sense why we would not be super aware of the the canopy ecosystem or like the canopy soil. But it it's a somehow dirt. I mean, it makes sense to some degree like the way that wind, wind blowing through the forest and the density of the canopy, like trapping a lot of stuff. But dirt is one of those things. And so there's stuff that grows up there. And we just don't even know Zack Jackson 05:34 I have that happening in my front yard, we're just noticing that there's a, there's a tree, and like the branches come out. And there's like a little, I don't know, pocket area where they're their branch away, and that the ants had eaten away in that little spot there. And so all like the decomposed ant poop or whatever, had made just like little thing of dirt. And there was a tiny sapling growing out of there. And I pulled it out, because I was like, that's gonna kill my tree. But I'm just I didn't realize that was happening, like Ian Binns 06:05 another tree to save a tree. Kendra Holt-Moore 06:09 Way to go, wow, Zack Jackson 06:11 there's some ethical implications there. Kendra Holt-Moore 06:14 Wow, that's cool, though. Zack Jackson 06:16 That's pretty amazing. Ian Binns 06:18 Tree murder. Zack Jackson 06:19 Hey, Kendra, that reminds me of the do you know about the like the insect jet stream? That's up there. Like, very far Rachael Jackson 06:30 up. I do love the bug. Kendra Holt-Moore 06:32 I think I do know about Zack Jackson 06:34 I do love books. It's true. Kendra Holt-Moore 06:37 It's not well, like, oh, go ahead, Zack Jackson 06:40 be flying airplanes in the early days of aviation. And they're like, why are there bugs on our windshield? Aren't we very hot 1000s of feet up in the air? Like, I mean, like 5000 feet up in the air and there's insects. I saw what estimate that like, How much was it, like somewhere between three to 6 billion insects are flying over your head up in like the jet stream all summer. They'll they'll get like caught up in updrafts. And then the wind is just blowing constantly up there. And so they'll just like travel. And they'll just fly around up there. Until they get they fall down to earth. And they're so light that, you know, it doesn't hurt them. And these aren't just like flying insects, you'll have like ants and stuff thrown around. Kendra Holt-Moore 07:25 That's really cool. I wonder if it's the same path, or like trajectory that other things will get like caught up in those high air streams to like sand. Like I think this is like part of how the dirt gets in the cannabis. There's sand from, you know, deserts that will kick up and travel from, you know, like Africa to the Brazilian rainforest. And the tiny organisms that live on those pieces of sand, nourish the soil, and nourish the ocean, like provide sustenance, like in places that you wouldn't expect that sand to end up. Like, you might not even think that sand travels. But I wonder if it's a shared sort of trajectory of the insects and sand. It's just like, it's crazy. It's in the world. unaccessible inaccessible to our everyday experiences, but it's just one big one big ecosystem. Zack Jackson 08:26 Yeah, every time I'm up there, there, the windows are closed. So I don't Ian Binns 08:33 you don't know if the sands gonna pull you in the face and Zack Jackson 08:36 Nope, never done it. So my story I wanted to share. Well, first of all, I'm six foot three. How tall is everyone else? Ian Binns 08:45 5656 511 and three quarters. Zack Jackson 08:52 Okay, so all of you are children. Adam Pryor 08:56 But I'm five, nine. Zack Jackson 08:59 Girl about to do with five inches tall on my screen. Well, did you know that that on average, we in our generation are three inches taller than people were 100 years ago. might have heard that. It's true. And one of the reasons is because of German submarines. Rachael Jackson 09:21 Okay, that's gonna need some explanation. Yeah, Kendra Holt-Moore 09:25 I'm so glad. So technically, she didn't ask she's like demanded mark that Zack Jackson 09:36 I'm into it either way. So in the early 19 hundred's, people didn't eat a whole lot of meat. Right, because they didn't have modern refrigeration, meats expensive. It's expensive to raise them to all of that stuff. And so when people did eat meat, it was usually like canned sardines. That was the most commonly used meat in those days, at right, awful, most of the good sardines came from off the coast of France, and then off the coast of New England. So it's Atlantic based sardines were the best ones. And then suddenly, during World War One, there are German U boats in the Atlantic. And we didn't have the ability to know where they were all the time. And so people kind of freaked out and they were like, I'm not gonna fish anymore. I'm gonna get blown up. So they stopped fishing sardines, and there were no more sardines, and Americans loved sardines. So, overnight, almost this giant new industry started in Monterey, California, fishing for sardines out in the Pacific. And the reason why people don't normally eat Pacific, sardines is because they're awful. They're like, gross, and massive, and, and oily and disgusting. And if given the choice, Atlantic ones are always going to win. But then we didn't have a choice anymore. So this whole industry boomed in Monterey. And all these new fisheries went up, and they were taking in tons and tons and tons. And then the war ended. And then boom, the whole industry collapsed. They had all these new fisheries, they had all these new processing plants they had, they had all this new stuff that nobody wanted to buy anymore. And so nobody quite knew what to do until this industrious young man and Max Schaefer showed up with a novel idea. And he took these sardines and instead of canning them for human consumption, mashed them all up into a nasty fish paste, and then mix it with grain, and marketed it to farmers as cheap chicken food. Ian Binns 11:40 Sounds so good. Zack Jackson 11:43 And it was cheap. And it was so full of nutrients, because it was fish that the chickens all grew really big. This led to really fat chickens, which led to tender delicious chickens, which led to the chicken of tomorrow breeding competition in 1948, in which farmers around the country were invited to breed the chicken of tomorrow. And the chicken that one that is basically the modern roasting chicken, the one that can't really fly that has whose like skin is is like light colored and is easily plucked, and has large. Adam Pryor 12:27 The chicken with boobs so big, they can't fly. Zack Jackson 12:29 Exactly. Yeah, the chicken that we know and love and eat today came from that. So the consumption of chicken then skyrocketed and became a part of American culture, fried chicken and chicken breasts and all of that. We started eating more meat. And then we grew. And so the reason why modern Americans are three inches taller than their counterparts is because of German U boats in the Atlantic in the early 19 hundred's Rachael Jackson 13:01 that's pretty cool. Right? Because you're asking how tall we were? Years ago, I was obsessed with just records for no reason. Like, I would read the Guinness Book of World Records for fun. Kendra Holt-Moore 13:17 You know, that's not what I thought you were talking about there, but I like this better. Rachael Jackson 13:22 Okay, yeah. Now, I meant so five foot two was the average heights for women in about 100 years ago, right. Nowadays, it's five foot five. So it's so if we say older people are so short, that's true. They really are that much shorter than we are and has nothing to do with like osteoarthritis or because the you know, the discs between their vertebrae are thinning or anything like that they they literally are just shorter than we are Zack Jackson 14:04 should have eaten more chicken. Rachael Jackson 14:05 And so now what are How tall are people going to get 100 years from now Zack? Like if Zack Jackson 14:14 massive hundreds of feet, I think will be a race of monsters. And then the Lord will have to flood the earth in order to read us Rachael Jackson 14:23 only that's at least what we try to have a ladder and build a tower. Because Zack Jackson 14:30 know the people who made the ark. Who are those people who built the life sized Ark Ken Ham in them? They're building a tower of Babel. I know. That's literally the point of the story is you're not supposed to build it. Adam Pryor 14:46 You're building a tower of Babel that's the plan is it is it like a like you know, like a twilight zone like tower terror drop, like wow, like you get to go up and Kendra Holt-Moore 14:56 really miss the Ian Binns 14:58 levels. Yeah, Zack Jackson 15:01 I feel like if they complete it, I want to they've they've missed the point. But if they like leave the top intentionally undone, then perhaps I'm like, that might be fun. Rachael Jackson 15:12 You know, you sit down in a way that Ian Binns 15:14 I definitely want to share this episode with him. Rachael Jackson 15:16 Yeah, you you share it. You said that no way, like, the same way that Robin Williams did in one of his stand up comedies, by the way from like, 20 years ago, where he talked about, you know, touching the nipples of gorillas Zack Jackson 15:34 I think that's on par. Right? Tempting God and touching the nipples of gorillas, Rachael Jackson 15:40 you know, he had got to know what's gonna happen Adam Pryor 15:45 might be like a good activity for the top of the tower. Good. Wow. So that to Kenny, I will. Well, Zack Jackson 15:55 yeah, what if you weren't blocked? Ian Binns 15:56 I'm gonna do it from our purse or? Zack Jackson 16:00 Oh, yeah. Ian's personal account got blocked by Ken Ham. So last time, he wanted to share one of our episodes, he had to use the down the wormhole Twitter handle, because he's trying to get us blocked in him too. So thank you. It was a really Rachael Jackson 16:14 good Astronics were taken Ian Binns 16:17 at Jennifer Wiseman, are there poking fun at the you know, the new telescope up there. And so I felt like you know, help him out a little bit. And say, if you want to be really cool about it, listen to this episode. Zack Jackson 16:30 That's right. That's right. Well, Ken Ham, you're welcome on this show, at any point, Adam Pryor 16:36 oh, Gorilla nipples, Ian Binns 16:39 on the top of the new tower of tower that you're building. I'm still trying to figure out what it is I've learned that I want to share. Rachael Jackson 16:51 I don't I don't have anything that that fun. Um, I've just taken some time away from the worlds and just delved into my hobbies. And so I think at this point, y'all know that I like to cross stitch. So I cross stitch, like so many different space things, I can certainly share a picture of it, it was really awesome, especially brain freeze black holes, and different nebulae, and it was just really fun. Zack Jackson 17:30 But, oh, the Pillars of Creation orgeous Rachael Jackson 17:33 I really enjoy the Pillars of Creation. I have been like, desperately following what's going on with web. And so it's just so unbelievably exciting to witness this thing that costs so many more dollars than than anyone ever thought it was possible. And that gives me hope for humanity. Right. So and, and being Jewish, and living in a place where Christianity dominates and not just your run of the mill Christianity, but like, you will believe kind of Christianity and to see that. Yeah, exactly. To to watch that. Adam Pryor 18:19 It's gonna be what, Zack? Zack Jackson 18:22 I'm offended. Do you imagine that? I'm like storebrand Christianity? Rachael Jackson 18:30 Not at all. Not at all. Adam Pryor 18:32 Okay, good. But I think you could use that in a scary way. Rachael Jackson 18:35 Yeah, Tower of Babel. Go on. It got pushed back. So for anyone that wasn't really following the it was supposed to launch on the 22nd. I mean, it was supposed to launch at various times. And then they were smart, and they didn't make it launch. And then they they decided to launch it on December 25. I was like Merry Christmas Jews, like, cuz the Jewish Christmas is fast food and movie. Things open. But it's like, Yes, I can watch this. Like, that's the best, it was the best. So watching that, and then having it unfold a couple of weeks, like it made it. And now knowing that somebody did really good math and made sure that there was extras, right. So if any of you have ever gone on a road trip, I was certainly thinking about this. Because we're looking at electrical cars. It's like, well, how far can we really go and since there's no no stations where you could like fuel up your your electrical car, you can really only go a very short distance in most parts of the country. So you then say, Okay, well, how far can I go? And then you give yourself a little bit of buffer room because you don't want to be stuck there. Well, someone over at NASA and when I say someone, I'm sure that it was many, many teams of people said well, we want to make sure that it's kind of get there, right, it's going to get to L two. We don't really need it to stop and so they just put extra fuel But they did a really great job. And instead of it possibly lasting for 10 years, they think they now have so much fuel it might last for 20 years. And that's just I didn't hear that far out. And it's just really exciting that they have so much that it was good fuel usage on the way there, that they have almost doubled the ability to live and send better. So and Zack Jackson 20:23 so it would only be able to live for 20 years, or could it Outlast that? Does it have the power? No, Rachael Jackson 20:28 I think it's probably going to depend on what signals they send it, and what technology we come up with. But it looks like probably only only in air quotes, you know, 20 years. And you know, Zack Jackson 20:43 it's Hubble's going all Rachael Jackson 20:44 right, but Hubble, especially if you have read the book handprints on Hubble, you'll know, fascinating book, by the way. Hubble is so different than Webb, and pretty much everything else that came before it. The concept with Hubble is that it could be repairable in space. But that's what made it so unique and so challenging to build is that they had to constantly go over and over and say like, Can an astronaut actually attach themselves to this, right? Like, where do you put the foothold because there's no torque, if you're not holding on to anything, you're just like, off into space with no gravity, you can't actually use a wrench. So what do you do. And because they made the concept of this being repairable in space, they could make it so much better than it is, well, web is not going to be repairable in space, because it's a little far. So whatever it is, is what it is. So everyone was holding their collective breath for all of everything to unfurl, and then it did beautifully. And they're still calibrating it. So it's still gonna be like another 10 ish weeks until things are fully calibrated, and really sending pictures. But that that's just sort of my, it's not really a story. It's just I think that one of the things that I look at here is all of these, let's go and preach your style here. All of these extras that they put into it, the buffers that they build in, like, we can totally do that in our lives. Like we can build in buffer for times, we can build in buffer for gas, we can build in buffer for crying. Not that I've been doing that at all. Like we can just build in these buffers for each other and ourselves. And I think it's beautiful. And we decided, like it took so many governments to put web up there and we worked together and I am so a utopian universe kind of person. Right? Star Trek and Marvel all the way. Screw you DC and Star Wars. Oh, I know that. But this Ian Binns 22:49 DC thing you didn't have to throw both of you did? Rachael Jackson 22:51 We did. It has that that that nugget of hope and humanity and we put so much money into it. It's insane. And if we can do that, nothing functional. That's Darn it. I thought Ian Binns 23:11 the force. Rachael Jackson 23:14 Okay, I'm just gonna sit here and wait. And I don't know if any of this gets recorded. Zack Jackson 23:18 Oh, you're moving against the freezer. Oh, there she is. Rachael Jackson 23:22 Oh, you're moving again. Okay, she Zack Jackson 23:25 froze during her idea. Thank Rachael Jackson 23:26 you. So anyway, yay, us. And perhaps we could use all of that money to give stable Internet to Podunk places like where I live, that'd be great. Zack Jackson 23:41 Well, I did hear that some solar flare interference, sort of a deal knocked out like a couple dozen Starlink satellites recently. Rachael Jackson 23:49 Is that a problem? Is that really the problem? Zack Jackson 23:54 I mean, I don't think Starlink internet it's very expensive right now. Rachael Jackson 23:59 I think it's that we just live in the middle of nowhere and have bad internet today. So that's, that's, that's that's my story. Ian Binns 24:06 I feel like Adam should follow up with something. Rachael Jackson 24:09 I think so too, because he has to bring it down. Like I've got all this like ideal. I gotta be Ben. So Adam. Zack Jackson 24:17 Already reboot. Kendra, Kendra Holt-Moore 24:19 Adam, are you going to talk about web because I almost shared a story that I thought maybe you would talk about but it's actually something that I learned indirectly. From you through Chad. I love this. Oh, you're not going to talk about that. Then I want to say that you should say you can Adam Pryor 24:35 you can say it. Go ahead. I Zack Jackson 24:36 have a story about clams that I can share too. Kendra Holt-Moore 24:40 So web then clans then Adam. Wrapping us up. Great. Ian still has listening. Zack Jackson 24:47 We've got time. We're only halfway through. We've got time. Kendra Holt-Moore 24:51 Um, okay. Well, two things I want to share. The first thing is I I'm really happy that we're talking about web because the other day I brought up The Webb telescope in my class, and all my students were like, Oh, is that? And I was like, Are you kidding me right now? No NASA nerds. And they were all like, like, everyone shaking their heads. And I was like, this is this is this is unacceptable. And so I sent them an email later that was completely, like, unrelated, you know, it was about class. And then the end of my email was like, also, just for fun, please go read about the Gobi school. But I, I have been so inspired by keeping up with this, that I put a little like anecdote about it in one of my dissertation chapters, because I'm writing about off. But I think what's really interesting about the kind of all and like, inspiration and energy that people feel around the Webb telescope, is that it's not just what it could do for us. It's not just that, like, How amazing would it be, if we learn all this stuff, by, you know, being able to see the infrared light and knowing about black holes and exploring other planets, like, there's a lot of potential that's amazing and inspiring of like, all these people working together to such a precise degree that we've had this, like international success. So that's like, on the one hand, but on the other hand, I feel like it's also really easy to get caught up in the story and want to follow it so closely, because there's so much at stake because if it fails, right, that's also a pretty major, like, we're either going to see human achievement, you know, at its pinnacle, or we're going to watch $10 billion, just flushed down the drain. And either way, it's kind of on spiraling. But the other thing I wanted to share, which is again, me stealing something that Adam actually learned recently, I don't know where you learn this, so you can share that. But apparently, like the Collaborate, like everyone knows the collaboration of the telescope team, like it was a, you know, a lot of people involved. But one of the people who contributed to the design of the telescope was an origami artist who worked with scientist to come up with the the design and the folding, you know, technique of the telescope to get it to fit inside of the rocket, so that it could be compact enough, and go far enough. And then only once it was outside of the rocket unfold the way that it did in, you know, with all its like, single point failure, possibilities that it overcame. But it was an origami artist who, like inspired scientists, by just like looking at how, you know, you fold up paper origami. And I just think that's so cool. And what a what an interesting what an inspiring testament to interdisciplinary work, which is why I think Adam was talking about this to chat, but for those of us in academia, who are all about interdisciplinary Ness. This is a perfect example because it's the humanities, the the artists, working together with the scientists to make something beautiful, functional, and you know, hopefully not disastrous, but something amazing. Rachael Jackson 28:37 It did unfold that I have to say, awesome, and I'm going to add that if anyone actually does origami, you can download the origami Webb telescope itself. Like they created the Webb telescope origami pattern. That's awesome. So just want to add that. Did they really? Yes. Would you like the links, John? Ian Binns 29:00 Yes, I do. Because John loves to do origami stuff. Yeah, I think I need that thing. Rachael Jackson 29:08 It's pretty amazing. It's pretty amazing. Ian Binns 29:15 Alright, Adam, what are you gonna do to bring us down? Adam Pryor 29:18 I thought Zack, I wanted to talk about Rachael Jackson 29:20 clam also Zack, are you gonna talk about other NASA thing? Ian Binns 29:24 I mean, I thought why more NASA stuff. Zack Jackson 29:26 I feel like I feel like several people are are hinting something to me and I'm not getting most of them. I know, my fun fact about clams was just that the water supply of Warsaw Poland is controlled by eight clams. What? Yo, yeah, no, it's true. They are the people. Okay. The people in charge of the Water Department found that clams were better at detecting pollution than any of their their artificial sensors. So they took eight clams. And they are in a tank, that the water comes from the treatment plant and it goes into the tank before it goes out to the people. And on top of the clams, they have basically hot glue to spring and put that in front of a sensor. So when the water gets too polluted, the clams close. And then the thing at the end of the spring touches the sensor and it's it turns off the water to Warsaw. And when the water is clean, they open back up again and the water turns on. And those clams are replaced every three months. And then they're put back in the pond. And they're given their March so that they don't get used again. And they have to go through a period of training in order to be to make sure that their senses are that's what I want to know Ian Binns 30:50 is the trainer. Eight clan Zack Jackson 30:53 clan Waterson Yeah. Yeah. Adam Pryor 30:57 I mean, essentially worse. I made clam thermostats. That's really what happened here. Zack Jackson 31:01 Yeah. And they work that they call it like there's a fancy word for bio monitoring. Huh? Adam Pryor 31:10 Yeah, that's just an easy way to say clam thermos. Zack Jackson 31:13 Yeah. I mean, it's a canary in the coal mine. But, but it controls the whole water supply. Adam Pryor 31:17 Yeah. Do they have like, like, does it can it like, Shut partway off? Like, you know, for clams today, we're close to your own rescue Zack Jackson 31:25 boil wars, like Minority Report. Right? Adam Pryor 31:29 But not when the clams are in the tank. Zack Jackson 31:31 Right? Don't do that. Don't do that. Adam Pryor 31:36 Because then train more. Zack Jackson 31:39 So what do you got? Adam? Adam Pryor 31:40 I want to make sure I understood the Zack Jackson 31:45 so this would be this would be like, textbook vintage, Adam, for you to come on and be like, Look, I got your question, but I did not. Well, and I would like to restate this in a way. Adam Pryor 31:56 Nine times out of 10. That's true. But so I'm supposed to come up with a story that has been inspiring to know how I learned Kendra Holt-Moore 32:06 just recently Zack Jackson 32:08 learned anything Adam Pryor 32:10 interesting. Just finding anything interesting or fun that I learned? Zack Jackson 32:14 Or inspirational or tragic? Or like or, or or? Okay. Well, I mean, the Sixers just got James Harden. You could we could talk about that. I talked Adam Pryor 32:27 about that. No, um, well, I guess. Zack Jackson 32:36 Are you looking around the room for inspiration? Kendra Holt-Moore 32:39 Do you mean something to you to talk about? No, Adam Pryor 32:42 no, I'm thinking like, cuz I I'm trying to say what to choose. Like. I mean, I could choose any number of depressing items. But that feels a little on the nose. Because a lot of what I've been learning is about the Kansas legislature right now. And that Oh, terrible. I don't think anyone should be subjected to that. Although I'm pretty sure it should be disbanded because they're useless. Coal coal. I've been Reading a lot about gerrymandering, but that also feels pretty, pretty dark. Even for me, that feels kind of dark, especially which state are living in Kansas is trying to put Lawrence inside the big first. If you don't know what the big first is, it's all of Western Kansas. And let me just say Lawrence is not in western Kansas. Right. So it makes this big U shaped come down and get Lawrence and put them into the big first. It's not political way. Yeah, these are the things I'm Reading about. Yeah, no, no, um, oh, wait, no, I have a heavy one. Hold on. Wait. Well, I mean, it's not happy. You happy, happy, happiest everything? I think it's happy. Um, hang on, man. I'm pulling it out to a low bar. So I was Reading this morning. This made me legitimately happy this morning. So I'm, in the times, there was this piece by Rabbi Lauren Holtz Blatt from Agoudas Israel congregation in Washington, DC. And she was writing about the whole debacle. Hmm. Feels like the correct term. Rachael Jackson 34:28 The misses with Whoopi Goldberg one, okay. Adam Pryor 34:31 Oh, yes. Yeah, right. Um, and, you know, if you're not aware of like, you know, Google it, you can find that, um, I was a little depressed the number of people who didn't know that that occurred, and I'm like, that says something about, you know, how Zack might haunt people. But what she wrote about in her piece, which I thought was really, really beautiful, and I'm going to do butcher the pronunciation and then you correct Rachel. So she wrote about tshuva should I get my accent right? Oh, yes. And as a process of Reading, renouncing, confessing reconciling and making amends right. And then she talks about to Shiva Shalimar complete Yep. Right this idea of complete to Shiva right where like, when you come into the same situation you act differently, right as knowing that this is like actually come to its peace. And then she makes this nice reference to tikun olam at the end of the article that like unless you're Jewish, you probably don't catch. I thought it was really brilliant. But I what, what I found, like, deeply hopeful about this idea is how generous a way of responding to that situation. That is, and that doesn't happen anymore. No one is that generous with other people today. And I kinda like that. At heart, I think there's something really beautiful about being able to write in the face of all horrible racism, that this is the kind of response we should be offering to one another. And it makes me more patient, generally, not specifically towards them. But generally, I like the idea of it. And what was the article? It's her opinion piece she wrote. It's called in the Jewish tradition, the words we choose matter. I just thought it was. It was really beautifully. I mean, it's beautifully written, like a whole wholesale, but I just the fact that that was how she decided to wrap this up and suggest people might engage. What has been a really, in some ways, underreported, in my opinion, and also poorly reported. Event. Is, is, I think, really helpful. Rachael Jackson 37:27 That's lovely. And I appreciate that you, you also brought it up. Yeah, it's definitely one of those things. Right? In Judaism, there is definitely that idea of if we believe that each person has the ability to mess up, and then fix their mess ups. How much more? How much more can we really ask of a person? And should we not then treat each other with that ability? So it's, I mean, she's she's farmer, erudite and Better Spoken than I also she's, she was writing instead of speaking, so she had the gift of editing. But no, it's really, it's wonderful. Right. And I think one of the challenges that we have, especially as Jews as like, Well, that was under reported. What about mouse? And what about, right, the synagogue shooting and in Texas, like, or hostage holding, not shooting, right? Like, how many of these things do we really want to be like, Hey, you didn't say that enough. So I like that there's this positive that you that Adam, you picked up this like, really good way of looking at this story. Thanks. Also to really great story. Adam Pryor 38:43 Yeah. Off to read that. There, I did something hopeful. Rachael Jackson 38:48 You shared 100 episode, you're like doing something different. Adam Pryor 38:55 I gotta flip things around. Zack Jackson 38:58 Keep it fresh. Just take us another three years to get through another positive. Adam Pryor 39:02 I mean, seems highly likely. Zack Jackson 39:06 Maybe the birth of your fourth child will springs there and into your life. Just, Adam Pryor 39:10 I mean, I probably won't be there. Let's just be real. 75% That's not Yeah. Ian Binns 39:21 If you're a professional athlete, maybe you make a lot of money. Adam Pryor 39:27 That's correct. C is for degree. So you tell your students. Yeah, I get degrees. They're struggling in my class. And they're like, 68. I'm like, Hey, you only got to get a degree. Well, sometimes I say that to majors, too. Not too many recently. Just a while. There. There were a couple. Ian Binns 39:54 I think the thing I want to talk about is I always appreciate The excitement around seen people on athletes at the Olympics. You know, there's always the, there's always issues with, you know how the Olympics are chosen. And you know, I'm not dismissing any of that what I like to see and I love to have the Olympics on is to just see their excitement that they have while they're doing something that they've spent an incredibly long time preparing for, right? And then even the the, like, good sportsmanship they tend to have for the most part, I mean, there's always issues but just how much they still celebrate each other because they realize that they're seeing something great. Like, it's really I just, it's very inspiring for me to see that to see people who are able to do some of these things that after they've done an event, you're just like, I don't understand how that just happened. Like how did that person just do that? You know, tricks, when you especially right now is skiing, you know, the aerials that they do, and stuff like that freestyle skiing, or whatever it's called. But even watching, like the level of excitement that occurs with cross country skiing, and biathlon, I'm not allowed to watch that. That's fun, curly, curly. It's fun, because they'll do things and everyone just be like, how did that just happen? Yeah, man. It's just it's so amazing to me that they're that far from the end. And they're able to like thread it between two of the rocks to hit this exact spot that they need to hit. It's just really cool. So that's kind of what's been going on in our house lately. Zack Jackson 41:32 And watch what was impossible, just like a decade ago, right? Someone would land like, like when Tony Hawk hit the like the 900. Right? Or whatever it was back in don't 20 years ago. That was that was mind blowing X Games explode. That and because there's nothing now it's like, oh, we figured it out. And now we can do it. We've progressed. Humans are amazing. Yeah. Rachael Jackson 41:54 What we asked him to do is really impressive. Ian Binns 41:58 Yeah, it's very, it's very interesting just to kind of watch these athletes who, as I said, that have dedicated their lives to perfecting what it is that they do. But to build on the Olympic theme, how about this? I was the first I now don't remember her name. But it was the first woman figure skater to land a quad. The Quad jump Kendra Holt-Moore 42:24 in the donation. Adam Pryor 42:26 Players that say you mean the dough for Oh, no. Ian Binns 42:28 Was she a doper? Yep. Did she test positive for doping? Yep. Oh. Does she really Rachael Jackson 42:39 do with extra hormones? Yeah, I mean, Adam Pryor 42:44 well, that's, I gotta say, right? Like, as you are seeing all this, I can't stop myself now. Now. We're gonna go for it right like Hopi and they like each other in this kind of thing. And I'm like, Yeah, you know what I see the instrumentalisation of 15 year olds by countries for profit. Ian Binns 43:00 See, this is the reason why I just get rid of that part. Kendra Holt-Moore 43:05 And I appreciate it because it parties. I love watching the clips. I watched the snowboarders yesterday and was like, Yeah, I'm gonna do that. I'm not, I'll never do anything remotely close to that. But it does. It makes you feel like you know, just before before Adam just ruins it. I just want to affirm your love of watching Olympic athletes. Rachael Jackson 43:28 Well, I'm I'm going to like switch teams here a little bit. And I'm totally with Adam. I can't stand Kendra Holt-Moore 43:37 I mean, you're you're not saying I just want it took them a while to think of something to share. have let them have this. Ian Binns 43:47 I'm not at all just dismissing the fact that you know, these that people are taking advantage of or anything like that. What I'm saying is that when you do see an athlete, excel at something that's exciting from even like, the NFL, right? Rachael Jackson 44:00 We'll never refuse. 100% Refuse to watch the NFL. It's just gladiators in the 20th century, and it's abusive in so many different ways and racist in unbelievable magnitudes. I watch the football. Ian Binns 44:15 A couple years ago, there was a marathoner who broke the two hour barrier. Are you gonna rain on that parade too? For me? Are we gonna be okay with that? Well, being Adam Pryor 44:23 surrounded by a whole team of people, was that really a good way to run a marathon fastest your hours? Ian Binns 44:31 It just could happen. Zack Jackson 44:34 The marathon is my favorite. Because like to home without why? Because the guy ran 26 miles from Marathon to Athens fell dead. And then we were like, We're gonna flex on this guy. And now we do it all the time. And we're just like, hey, one guy died doing this. Let's do it. And like, the net Great. That's Got it. Also, fun fact, the president of the Olympics for life for all time is King Herod the Great. Did you know that Ian Binns 45:13 I did not. The Olympics Zack Jackson 45:14 had fallen under disrepair. There was no money for it. They did. They barely happened. And Herod was travelling through the Greek area in 12 BC. Yeah, he was there in 12 BC. And he went, and he was like, Wow, this sucks. And he's like, here, if I give you tons of talents, are you going to be able to make this great? And they were like, Yeah, and he's like, then go zoos. Here you go, here's a ton of money. And they revitalize the Olympics. And it became a big thing again, and he was named president of the Olympics for life in perpetuity. And so his statue was there. And he is for all eternity. The president of the Olympics. I mean, it does make a lot of sense. I know Christians love to hate the guy, but Rachael Jackson 45:59 it does make a lot of sense, right? Like, he's this is how messed up the Olympics are. Right? He's the guy that decides to kill his whole family. So it Adam Pryor 46:10 I think they should start leading the Parade of Nations with a sketch. point home. Zack Jackson 46:16 I mean, do it. You know, one time Cleopatra came to visit, and she was like, showing them up. And he was like, he went to his guy. And he's like, can we kill her right now? And he's like, You can't kill Cleopatra. And he's like, but she's here. We can kill her now. Right? And they're like, You can't kill Cleopatra. And he almost did it. Because he's nuts. Right, but he loved the Olympics. Yeah. Rachael Jackson 46:39 It could have just been the metaphor. We ran on. Ian Binns 46:41 We're gonna go watch the Olympics. Fun. Let's go watch the bath one because I'm certain on the next lap, they're gonna all turn the rifles on each other. Like Adam and Rachel want Adam Pryor 47:06 to take solace in the fact that you got Rachel and I think that's the takeaway. Ian Binns 47:12 Oh, that person's head fell off when they land. There. Oh, no, that guy's a racist. Rachael Jackson 47:20 You know, it's just trauma. It's when I see the skiers. I can't see this gear. So no. Oh, yeah, I broke my body. I broke my brain. Oh, I totally, totally broke my brain Zack Jackson 47:31 that was in a previous episode. Everything. Ian Binns 47:34 We'll talk more about, like, you know, running not doing no, they cheat too. So no, javelin maybe someone hasn't been pierced lately. Kendra Holt-Moore 47:45 Well, setting aside just like the terribleness of human nature. Yeah, I, I wanted to also add, um, so like, I haven't really watched the Olympics flick very carefully. This year. I usually don't, I usually just like watch clips of things. So the stuff that I've seen is like ice skating clips, and like snowboarder clips. But I've been I was just thinking, the last couple of days about Simone Biles, and just the whole phenomenon of the twisties. Because a lot of the stuff that I'm looking at for like the snowboarders and ice skaters, you know, it's like a lot of tricks, a lot of jumping, and flipping and all of that. And I just, it is really amazing, especially knowing my own very limited abilities. It's like not an athlete person, but who has worked so hard to have, like very basic snowboarding skills, that it's, it feels so good when you can get to a point where your body just does. And that's kind of what you have to do to like, do it. Well, it's like the whole problem of the twisties. And like, when you start to think about what you are trying to do athletically, it messes with you and so it's just really interesting, like giving in to just your body. And I it's it's really like a very meditative experience and you have to be skilled, of course, but it's just such a such an interesting part of living in a body when we are so easily like distracted in our heads. So to separate those experiences, Ian Binns 49:19 you bring it up smoking balls, you know, the last Olympics, the Summer Olympics watching, especially being that your daughter Ellie is a gymnast, right? It's an even recently talking about you know, and so, I've always been impressed and admired have always admired Simone Biles, I think you know her what she embraced her struggles with her own. Her mental health journey I thought made her even more impressive. But when you talk again about someone who's become like an expert at what it is they do, like the things that she can do, is just mind boggling to me like what she is capable of as an athlete. Just her athletic ability, right? But even talking with Ellie Avella explaining to me that we talked about, you know, the other day that Ellie had a competition last week and met. Mary Lou Retton. Right, honey, who did le meet last week, Mary Lou Retton. Yeah, so she met Mary Lou retina at a competition last week. And it was really cool to hear about it. And I was kind of saying like, Oh be, you know, someone else get a 10 good Simone get a 10. And her response was, is that she her strength and power is so great, that the skills that she does that gets her such high scores would not wouldn't make it I think, very challenging forever to get a perfect score. Because you know, the way the score is done, that level is very different than the standard level, but that her power that Simone Biles has is just that much better than most anyone else in the world. That that's why be challenging for her become to get a perfect score because she challenges herself to that level. Does that make sense? Like she could land thing if she did Rachael Jackson 50:59 what other competitors did or if she did what other competitors did, she would get a perfect score, but because she pushes herself to make it harder. Ian Binns 51:07 And that's what raises like her ability to get even higher scores those because they realize that we have to change the scoring because of the tricks and the things that she's able to do the skills that she's able to do me that we have that scoring has changed, Miss fascinate, right. Zack Jackson 51:23 They had to outlaw some moves that she did, because no one else could do it. Ian Binns 51:28 They call it the Biles. I mean, she's got several moves on several different apparatus apparatus that are named after her, which is also on the land it Kendra Holt-Moore 51:37 just let her do it and let her just went all the time. Because yeah, pretty cool. Ian Binns 51:41 Right? Thank you, Kendra for bringing that one up. Because now I feel better again. Rachael Jackson 51:46 And I don't want to I don't want to poopoo the athletes themselves. They're doing amazing things, just the institutions they're in. Oh, absolutely. Yeah. So just just to clarify, I don't mean to make any athletes upset. I think that what they're doing is truly incredible. Because I Ian Binns 52:01 would love to get Simone on here. Zack Jackson 52:05 Yeah, yeah. And if any Olympic athletes or regular listeners of the podcast I'd love to have you on to have you on Jake's, especially if you're in the by athalon would love to learn more about how that Aikido? Yes, that's one of my absolute favorite and Ian Binns 52:17 ensures my favorite winter sport to watch is potentially bad. Yeah. Or I Rachael Jackson 52:22 love calm you go. I'm your heart rate slow enough after doing this incredible thing that you can shoot steady. Ian Binns 52:30 That's impressive. So I'm Rachael Jackson 52:33 so American. Zack Jackson 52:34 They're like, yeah, here's a cool sport. How can we make it better? aren't that good at it? Yeah. What we're not good at a gun sport. And Ian Binns 52:43 we're not nearly as good as the countries, then the Canadians think they beat us every time Zack Jackson 52:50 unacceptable. So we're nearing the end here, buddy. And we're nearing the end here. And I love I want to, there we go. I want to say thank you to all of you, all the four of you. And thank you to myself as well. Because you all are incredible. And it has been a minute since we've had all of us here. And it has felt so good. Just to be here. For this time. I want to thank everyone at home or in the car or in the gym or wherever it is that you're listening. Now, those of you who have listened to all 100 episodes, and those of you who this might be your first You are wonderful people as well. I would invite you to check out the down the wormhole conversations group on facebook and join us there. We've got some. It's really fun to be able to talk with folks on there. And yeah, you can check us out on Patreon as well if you'd like to support the show. Does anybody have any closing stories or thoughts or fun facts you want to share before we call it a day? Rachael Jackson 53:52 I think Zack you should share the story of the person that works at NASA. It's a quick little Zack Jackson 54:00 it is a quick little story NASA has let me let me pull up the Kendra Holt-Moore 54:08 while Zack is looking that up, I'd encourage everyone to go look up whales, bubble netting to catch their fish. Because that's, 54:18 that's amazing. Zack Jackson 54:20 I'd also encourage people to look up the story of how Pepsi briefly in the 80s became the sixth largest military in the world. Ian Binns 54:29 I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Zack Jackson 54:31 That's a fun story as well, right? Rachael Jackson 54:33 That's homework, Pepsi military in the 80s. Zack Jackson 54:39 Basically, and here we go. In the 50s. They were trying to make peace between the Soviet Union and America. And so Eisenhower put together this American National Exhibition in Moscow, and he sent Nixon over there and Nixon is not a nice person. And so Nixon and Khrushchev are talking and then they start fighting about capitalism and communism. And so the CEO of Pepsi sees them fighting and steps in there. And he's like, Here you go. And it gives Khrushchev, a Pepsi, and he drinks it and he goes, damn, or whatever the equivalent Russian is, this is amazing. We have to have this. The problem was there was all of these, you know, trade issues. And not everyone accepted Soviet currency. And so Pepsi didn't want to do this transaction. So they signed a deal in which the Soviet Union would purchase Pepsi with vodka. And that was their agreement for like, 30 years. So then in the late 80s, the agreement was expiring. And Pepsi was like, we don't want to get paid in vodka anymore, what else you got? And they were like, well, you still don't want to take our money. So here's what we have. And Pepsi in exchange for $3 billion dollars worth of Pepsi products, gave the Pepsi corporation 17 submarines, a cruiser a frigate and a destroyer. Which then for that amount of time made them the sixth largest military in the world. Pepsi then flipped all of that to a Swedish scrap recycling company and made back the money. But for that period of time, Pepsi was the sixth largest military in the world. So that's my fun Pepsi fact. But anyway, every single thing that goes up into space that goes up into a habitable space, so anything that goes up into the, into the space station or in a in a ship that has humans in it has to pass the sniff test, literally, from a man called George Aldrich is the chief sniffer of NASA. And anything that goes up there has to be smelled by him. And then he has to approve it or not, because they they need somebody with a very sensitive nose to smell if like, is this going to be awful to be locked in a room with this? So if you want to get something sent to space, it's got to be sniffed by nostril Damas. So if that column Adam Pryor 57:03 I hope they quarantined him for a long time, so I didn't get COVID Zack Jackson 57:06 right how awful would that Kendra Holt-Moore 57:08 would that's a client he Rachael Jackson 57:09 needs to have insurance on his You had one Adam Pryor 57:11 job. I seems like you could train clamps to do this. Zack Jackson 57:19 I don't know if you know how smell works. But Ian Binns 57:23 I just looked that up, you know, nostril Damas because I saw that you put in my chat, Rachel. And I saw I typed that into Google and now that now that does come up as the second story. Second thing don't click on the first one with the Urban Dictionary and Rachael Jackson 57:43 you're not that is not this is not safe for work portion. Do not don't talk about that. Click Ian Binns 57:50 on that link. It is definitely NSFW. Not Safe For Work if you don't know. Rachael Jackson 57:56 Yeah, and that's dw.com like Ian Binns 58:00 Well, the thing is, is that I started looking at it. While right before Zacks are talking, I thought myself Adam Pryor 58:07 Where the heck is this story? 58:09 Like they have nothing to do with each other. Like oh my gosh, this is so funny. Ian Binns 58:14 Kendra, are you looking it up right now? Rachael Jackson 58:17 No, don't don't Zack Jackson 58:19 just dear listener, don't don't worry about urban dictionary and teenagers putting crazy in there that they have nobody's gonna want to look at this. Don't worry about it. Instead, you can search for George Ulrich Aldrich, NASA employee g4. Rachael Jackson 58:37 If you're that, you know you can go back and listen to the rest of our other podcasts either for the first time or another time. Zack Jackson 58:45 Literally 99 other episodes you can listen to. Rachael Jackson 58:48 Did exactly do not go to Urban Dictionary go to D TW. Zack Jackson 58:52 Hey go that's a great closer, Greg sign off
Episode 99 Last time, we talked about relativistic time and its implications for faith in a theistic god. That conversation was... heady to say the least. So, here to help us further understand what all that means is our good friend Dr. Timothy Maness. We talk about the flow of time, where/when God is, fate, and more. Ready to have your mind blown? Timothy Maness is a scholar of science and religion whose recent dissertation, which he is currently adapting into a book, discusses ways of reconciling relativistic physics with a flowing model of time, in which past, present and future are really distinct from one another. It also explores how a relativistic theory of flowing time can complement Abrahamic theology, and serve as the basis for a view of existence centered on personhood. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:06 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. Our guest today is an incredible scholar of science and religion whose recent dissertation which he is currently adapting into a book discusses ways of reconciling relativistic physics with a flowing model of time, in which past, present and future are really distinct from one another. It also explores how a relativistic theory of flowing time can complement Abrahamic theology, and serve as the basis for a view of existence centered on personhood, here to unpack what all of that means, and more is our good friend, Dr. Timothy Maness. Welcome to the podcast. Tim. Tim Maness 00:50 Hi. It's great to be here. Yeah, I've been I've been a regular listener. And I've been I've been wanting to get on for quite some time. Zack Jackson 00:57 I have been, we have been talking about having you on since almost the beginning of the podcast. So I do apologize. Tim Maness 01:03 I know you guys have had a lot of things to talk about to, to clarify for our listeners, the wonderful Sinai and Synapses fellowship that is, is run by the the Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, the the same cohort of fellows were the hosts of the podcast met, I also had the privilege of meeting them as well. So we were we were all friends in that, that fellowship. So we've known each other for a while now. It was Zack Jackson 01:33 a very good cohort. And the very first time that I met him, I remember us standing awkwardly as people do when they first meet, maybe nibbling on a bagel or something and saying, What are you doing? And of course, I felt completely out of place. Because, you know, I'm a, I'm a pastor who likes science, and I'm in a room filled with people with advanced degrees and understandings of things that are beyond my, my understanding, and that, you know that what do they call it? That imposter syndrome that everyone? You know, everyone will? I do? Say everyone, because we all think we're imposters, right? Yep, yep. Yeah, I was really feeling it. And I was all I had done some work in seminary on on relativistic time, and theology and our understanding of God and salvation. And so when I asked him, What is he was working on. And he said, he explained some of his dissertation and how it was exactly what I had been working on, I got so excited, I said, we need to talk, I need to read this, I need to, we need to hear it. And then when he started explaining it, to me, it went so far over my head, I realized how much I still had to learn. And I have and he's been really helpful in helping me to understand some things and inspiring me to learn more and to dig deeper into the things I thought I knew, and the implications that I thought were there. And so it's, it's, it's really nice to have you here to help unpack and open up some of this stuff. I think it was St. Augustine that said, I understand time fully until you asked me to explain it. I, Tim Maness 03:07 that's that's one of my go to quotations, I think might be the introduction of my dissertation starts with that. Zack Jackson 03:15 Oh, well, there you go. That's, that'd be fun to defend, I would imagine, where you just start off by saying, I can't explain any of this stuff. Tim Maness 03:24 Yeah, yeah. But one of the things I want to argue is that is that you know, the average person, but But you, dear listener, understand time in you that you have in an important understanding of time, that, that you that ought to be taken into account. And that one of the ways that, that a lot of the philosophy of time over the past, you know, century and a bit has has failed, is in failing to take our everyday experience of time into account. So, I think that, you know, I want to be careful about trying about about going over people's heads. I think it was Einstein, who said that, if that happens is that one of the things that that's a sign of is that the person who is explaining doesn't understand their subject as well as they should. Zack Jackson 04:25 So yeah, that's the, that's what sets like Jesus's teachings apart is that you can say a whole lot in a little bit because you really get it or Mr. Rogers. Yeah. So maybe you can help us to understand a little bit, you mentioned that we have an experience of time. I think that kind of goes without saying that the past is what you did. The present is what you're doing in the future is what you will do, and they're all connected causally. But that's about it. Right? You know, and that there's a static flow of time like a conveyor belt, almost Right, but that's not, that's not exactly how things panned out in the early 1900s. Tim Maness 05:06 Yes, that's true. There are these these three modes of time, these three sort of general tenses, you might say there, if you get into the grammar, but you can come up with more that, that constitute our relationship with time. The, the philosopher, Immanuel Kant talked about PILOTs, one of the categories of our experience, you know, this thing that sort of gives shape to, to the way we experience the world. And, you know, we experienced that the past is accessed through through memory, that's the past is, is this set thing that we, that we, that we know, of, it's definite for us. To some extent, it's definite, but we forget things as well. But it's it's set, it has its own existence, and the future doesn't exist yet. It's some, it's the, the domain of, of sort of planning and also guesswork. It's, it's there to be defined, and the present is where those two things come together. But it's also more than that. It's, it's the, it's the way of, of the mode of times existence in which we can act, in which we make decisions, and, and do things. And it's those decisions, that that shape, the future. And all of those things are, are, are deeply tied in to our way of living in the world as human beings. Right, you know, that's all of those have a very sort of narrative kind of character to them. That it's like, it's like a story, right? That we talked about having a beginning and a middle and an ending. And even before Einstein, a lot of philosophers and scientists were kind of suspicious about that way of talking about time, precisely because it was so human. So, you know, the, the great philosopher, Bertrand Russell, who, you know, contributed so much to the philosophy of mathematics, among other things. Writing before Einstein said that, basically, the fact that this way of thinking about time has so much of the human in it has so much of our subjective, personal way of, of experiencing things into it, that, but there must be something wrong with it. Basically, that in order to be really scientific, where a scientific, you know, is considered to mean the same thing as rigorous. And, you know, and well thought out, then, a way of thinking also has to be objective, it can't rely on any particular point of view. And so Rafal, among others, thought it was better to imagine that that time, was I didn't really have this, this past present future character, that the differences among these three ways of, of experiencing time, were just an illusion, that are brought on by by some, some weird thing about human consciousness or another. And that, in reality, all events in time, exist in the same kind of way. In my work, and in the work of a lot of philosophers of time, we draw on the A category that got set up by this, this philosopher named James McTaggart, who wrote about sort of two ways that we have of talking about time, the A Series and the B series, like many philosophers, he was not really great at creative names. And so the A Series is, is it involves differences in past and present and future in that way that we talked about, imagines that, that the time flows, you might say that, that an event is, is in the future, and then it's in the present, and then it's in the past. And it has all of these different characteristics of past present and future as time goes on. And then on the other hand, there is the B series, and in the B Series events don't have the past, present and future relationships. All they have are the relationships with earlier and later on So for instance, if you can imagine looking at like a history textbook, and you see events on a timeline, where, you know, pen 66, the, the, the Norman invasion of England happens. And, you know, there's in, in this month of that year, this happens. And then a later month of the year, this happens and all of the events are sort of laid out next to each other on a line. All of those events sort of have the same kind of existence. They're, they're, they're sort of different modes of existence that used to see in the A series, the past, the present, and the future stuff. And in our daily lives, we use both of these all the time. Whenever you are planning out your schedule for the day, you are thinking about time in a B Series kind of way. You're saying, Well, alright, I'm gonna sit down to record this podcast at 9am. And then, you know, for my, you know, I should probably have lunch in there somewhere. So it's penciled in for noon, I've got this this other phone call that's scheduled at 330. And you're sort of laying these things out. That way, sort of, in kind of as though you're laying them out in space. And, and again, it's just, it's just an earlier later kind of relationship. But in order to, to take that schedule and translate it into something that you actually do, you also have to bring in the A series there comes a point where, you know, it's not enough just to say, you know, alright, I am starting this podcast at 9am, you are not able to actually do the things necessary to start the, you start the podcast, until unless you have the the impression that at some point 9am is now and and now is a concept that the B series does not have. There is there is no one moment that it picks out is having that special characteristic of noun, it's that moment where, you know, we are where we are acting in the present where things are present to us. You know, there's there's just earliness and lateness and, and so it takes that that intersection between the A Series and the B series in order to to make the the events that we schedule happen. So we have both a ways of picking the time and B ways of taking that time and we use them both all the time. McTaggart his question, or his way of framing the question is, which one of these two ways of thinking is the more fundamental one? Is it the case that time is is really like the B series that, you know, events all have the same kind of existence, and they're ordered by earlier and delayed earlier and later? And our sense of past, present and future is some weird kind of illusion that comes out of our brains? Or is it the case that time really has a past or present in the future, and the B series just comes out of our way of writing things down? And it turns out that, that McTaggart actually thought that neither of these was true, and that he thought that time was the time was just an illusion. But the use terminology sort of gave names to two of the major camps, the people who think that the past present future way of thinking about time is the more fundamental one tend to call themselves a theorist or talk or to talk about flowing time and the people who think that the B series of time the earlier and later there is no now, way of thinking about time is more fundamental They call themselves the B theorists. So, for instance, Bertrand Russell is is a good example of a a b theorist. And you have you know, even quite quite distinguished philosophers and and scientists people like like the, the eminent French, the French philosopher Ali Belkacem was a major proponent of the a theory. The the physicist Arthur Eddington was a major proponent of the a theory. So, this is this is already a hot topic of discussion coming into the 20th century, when Einstein is still a patent clerk and hasn't haven't made a name for himself yet. But then comes relativity as as as Zack has has already talked about, dear listeners and, and that throws a wrench in everything. thing. And it turns out that the assumption that was made in Newtonian physics and, frankly, has probably been made by just about everyone else ever. That, that everybody shares the same now. And that, you know, now is the same moment, you know, here on the East Coast of the United States, as it is in, you know, on the west coast that, you know, it might be the case that the time that we call, you know, 1030, on the east coast, is 630. On the west coast, we, you know, we assign it to different times on the clock, but we can agree that it's now, right, that, you know, you see this in like in like, you know, TV scheduling, for instance, you know, or at least you know, in the days before streaming, we used to we used to talk about TV scheduling this way, but you know, this thing is this, the show is going to come on at, you know, 730 Eastern 630 Central. That, you know, we assign the time when the show begins different moments on the clock, depending on the timezone, but we can agree that the time when the show starts is the same, even if people assign it to two different moments on the clock. So, so this assumption that, that there's the same now that exists here on the East Coast, and over there on the West Coast, and over on the planet Mars, and over in the Andromeda Galaxy, it is all one now, Einstein says, nope, nope, that's not true. That how we experience time, depends on where we are and how fast we're moving. And that people are going to disagree about how long things take. And about what things take place at the same time as each other, depending on how they're moving relative to the events that they're talking about. And that this sort of multisyllabic way of talking about that concept is the relativity of simultaneity. Simultaneous the fact of happening at the same time, simultaneously, the quality of happening at the same time. That's relative in in Einstein's terms, and, and the sort of classic example that that we have for that is, goes back to Einstein. It involves trains. And I think that the trains are going to come up a lot as an image has, as I talked about this. So you mentioned you've got a train that's that's moving past a station. And in the middle of one of the train cars, there is a flashbulb that will go off, let's say for an art project. And the flashbulb goes off in the middle of the train. And light starts coming out of the flashbulb and going towards the two ends of the train. You remember from the previous episode on relativity, that the speed of light is invariant, it's the same for all observers, we might say, for observers in all reference frames, for all points of view. And so a person who is sitting in the middle of the train next to the flashbulb, let's say it's the artist is going to, from that person's point of view, since the light bulb is in the middle of the train, light from the light bulb, is going to hit both ends of the car at the same time, light bulb is exactly in the middle, lightest traveling at the same speed. So it is going to take the same amount of time to hit both ends of the of the car, the front in the back. So from in that person's reference frame, the reference room with the artist on the train, the moment when the light hits the front of the car. And the moment when the light hits the back of the car are going to be simultaneous will happen at the same time. From the perspective of a person who is sitting on a platform as the train goes by, you know, presumably they're waiting for the local and this is the Express that's passing. And they're they're looking at this car wondering what on earth is going on with this flashbulb in this train car. From their perspective, the back of the car is is instead of moving toward this, this is the place where where the where the light was emitted, and the front of the car is moving away from it. So from the perspective of the person who is, you know, sitting at sitting on the platform with the train cars moving past, the light will hit the back of the train earlier than it hits the front of the train. So those two events are not simultaneous, one happens before the other. And the weird thing about relativity, or one of the many weird things about relativity is that it tells us that, that neither of these people is right, and neither of them is wrong. It's not the case that that motion is introducing some kind of distortion into things and that the person who was sitting still is right, because you can't say who's sitting still and who's in motion, all you can do is say that, you know, this is in motion with respect to this. So there's no matter of fact, about whether or not these two events happen at the same time, they happen at the same time in one reference frame, and they don't happen at the same time in in another reference frame. And that's all you can say, the the simultaneity of these two events is relative. So, if that's the case, then the idea of now becomes kind of complicated. You can't say that, you know, you can't say definitively I should say that, you know, a given set of events are all happening at the same time, a time that we can call now, some people moving at some speed with respect to those events are going to assign them all to the same. Now, some people are going to say that, you know, events, A and B are in the past of events C, and some people are going to divide things up differently altogether. So, past and present and future, from a point of view of relativity become a lot harder to divide up. And so, a lot of people, what they get out of this is the idea that this must mean that relativity is basically giving us a knockdown, scientific physical argument, that the are not just an argument that are proof that the beef theory, the the only earlier and later no past present, and future way of looking at time, is really the more fundamental one, that past and present and future are just things that human beings with their weird little brains are imposing on the the grand, impersonal scientific universe. How are we doing so far? Zack Jackson 23:06 Great. Ian Binns 23:07 I'm just listening. Because it still always blows my mind. All the time just blows my mind. Zack Jackson 23:14 It's mind blowing. Well, anytime you say that, anytime you say that. You experience it this way. But the mathematics suggests that it's this other way. I mean, that in and of itself, you know, you've heard it said, But I say to you, right, you're blowing minds. Tim Maness 23:29 Right? And, and, and that's, you know, that plays in with, with that, that way of thinking about science that Russell had, right? That, you know, here we have this this problem that philosophers were debating about, for centuries and centuries, and long come the physicists, and they solve it. Right? That, that, you know, it's the philosophy is, is about endless, fruitless debate. And science comes in and cuts the Gordian knot, and gives us, you know, the way things really are, and, you know, avoids all of this fog of mere language and gives us the truth in mathematics. And, you know, that's, that's something that philosopher after philosopher in the 20th century, brings out of this. And one of the things that they that they do, not universally, but really kind of a lot is that they, they go on from saying, mathematics is, you know, is reliable in a way that subjectivity and language aren't to saying that basically, the human experience of personhood is an illusion of of a similar kind. That, that all of all of our the subjectivities of our experience What what is sometimes called qualia, the hardness of our perceptions, you might see people talk about the redness of a rose, as opposed to the knowledge that you know, light is being reflected off of the rose itself in such a, such a wavelength, you know, or the, the, the emotional side of, of hearing music, as opposed to just being able to describe it in terms of, you know, frequency and amplitude, that all of that stuff is, you know, is is illusion. And that the, the math of those experiences is all that's really real. So, that has a lot of implications for religion, right? Because, so much of you know, of, of our religious experience is personal. In this way. One of my my favorite philosopher theologians, the, the Dane with the rather difficult to pronounce, name of Sir and Kierkegaard, you know, has has this, this whole book, where he talks about how the sort of basis of, of religious experience is this thing that happens inside of you that you can never fully communicate to someone else. And that all of our attempts to talk about religion are attempts that fail, more or less, to take this inexpressible thing, and put it out where other people can see it. And, you know, and and you hear you have this, this, this emerging philosophical viewpoint that, that claims to have, you know, to perceive basically scientific proof for itself, that that's just nonsense, that that nothing that's inexpressible in mathematics can even really exist, that anything else is a delusion. And even if you don't follow things quite that far, even if you don't take from this, the, that, you know, the science is really showing that human subjectivity is an illusion. Taking this, this sort of be theory view of time, poses a lot of problems for religion by itself. So if the B theory is true, time looks a lot like space. And all, you know, all the parts of space, all spots in space exists sort of alongside each other. And in the same way. Here's where here's where I bring in another one of my training analogies, that lots of train, what's the train analogies train? Zack Jackson 27:55 Well, they go in straight lines. So it's very convenient. Tim Maness 27:57 Most of the time, you know, if you're, if you're, if you're, if you're in the loop in Chicago, all bets are off for a lot of reasons. But so but but imagine that I'm going to train this traveling in a reasonably straight line, I'm on the Amtrak going up the East Coast, right? And imagine that my train is temporarily stopped in Philadelphia. And you know, maybe I'm going to get off at the station and grab a cheese steak and then get on before I move on north. So when I'm there on the train in Philadelphia, right. Washington DC still exists, even though I've left it, right. It's not present to me now. But it's still there. And New York and Boston, even though I haven't gotten there yet, exist, they're real. There are things going on there that are that are happening, even though I don't perceive them, they are real. So the, in this be theoretic way of looking at time now is like Philadelphia, and the pastor's like, DC. And the future is like New York and Boston. The past is still there, even though that's not where I am now. And the the future is out there that exists, like York and Boston do even though I'm not there now. And the present doesn't have anything really special about it. It's just where I happen to find myself at a particular moment. Right. So if that's the case, if that really is the best description of how time is and a lot of the stories that we tell, that involve time, which is to say all stories that we tell become, well, they become sort of different. So, in, in, in religion, right, we have a lot of stories about, say about people changing their lives. Right? Where, you know, in, in, in the Bible, God says to God says to people, you know, turn your lives around. And then as a result of your turning your life around, this will happen to you. Or if you don't turn your life around, this won't happen to you. Yes. So that sort of way of thinking about about the stories of people's lives depends on a particular way of talking about time, right? The the events, after you make that that critical decision to turn your life around or not to, you know, have some conversion or some repentance or some whatever else, that depends on an idea that the future doesn't exist yet, but it's there to be shaped by your decisions. And so it makes sense to talk about the events that happen after that, that decision as being in some way more important than the events that happen before. Right? That what happens later, can change the meaning of what happened earlier, can in some limited way, maybe make up for what happened earlier, can be more relevant than what happened earlier. This, this is sounding plausible, based on on, you know, the way that you think about time and, you know, regular everyday way Zack Jackson 31:44 I hear kind of, at least in the scriptural analogy, there's kind of two stories that popped to my mind, I think of that whole, that whole paradigm is so important for the province, right? They they come before the people and they say, here's what you've done. Here's what you need to change, or else, this is what will happen, right? That's sort of the formula of every one of the problems, they're giving you a chance to repent, to change to move. So your future is not totally decided yet. The future is uncertain, it's being written now. And then the other story I think of is that of Moses and Pharaoh, where God tells Moses, go to Pharaoh say, Let my people go. And he goes to Pharaoh and says, Let my people go. And then God hardens Pharaoh's heart, because God has an ending in mind already, and is going to, like the future is unchangeable. In that story, there was always going to be plagues always going to be an exodus always going to be that. And God is still telling Moses to do this thing now, despite the fact that it's not going to change anything, because God is going to intervene, because the future is fixed. All right. And of those two stories, people generally tend to accept the prophetic version a lot easier than the the future is already fixed. And God is behind the scenes, you know, making this a deterministic situation, right? Because then they think, why do I even bother? Yeah, what's the point of any of this if the future is already if the future is already real? And whatever, you know, I should just sit back and do nothing. Yeah. Yeah. Tim Maness 33:23 And which is not to say that there haven't been some theologians who have tried to embrace that, that sort of the future is set way of looking at things, right. Where you have people who are in favor of have a strong view of looking what gets hold predestination, where, where God has already set out your entire future for you, where all of the events of your life exists, like, like, you know, like, like, all the events in a book, right, where everything has already happened, even before you've in a circumstance, even before you've read it, it's just a matter of, you know, going through the pages, until you get to the the ending that was already there. And people like, you know, like John Calvin, in the in the Christian tradition, tend to have a strong view of predestination. That's, that is a really common view in, in Muslim theology. It's, you get a lot of Muslim thinkers who have that that particular strong view that God has planned out all of history. It's very uncommon in Judaism, you will find very few Jewish thinkers who wouldn't rather go with that sort of open future. There's there there's very little Jewish support for the idea of predestination. So yeah, you have you have, you can find some theologians who are going to be on either side of this debate. But on the whole, you're right people do like to they do like to opt for the idea of the open future because it makes our choices more meaningful. Right? It means that our choices are made, or at least, are potentially made by us. They aren't sort of written out ahead of time for us by God. And that means, for instance, that, that if we're making our own choices, that that that has implications for God's responsibility for evil in the world. If God has already made everybody's choices for everybody beforehand, then that means that God is responsible for all of the evil that people do. That God decided already decided, every time somebody was going to commit a murder. God made that happen, rather than than the person choosing to commit that murder against God's will. Zack Jackson 35:57 Yeah, it's holding a marionette responsible for its puppeteers act. Right. Exactly. Ian Binns 36:03 The idea of fate, right? No. Tim Maness 36:05 Yeah. Yeah, sure. Yeah. Right. Yeah, that's that's our Ian Binns 36:09 that's already written or something like that. Is that kind of the same? Tim Maness 36:13 thing? I think that's that's, that's a great one syllable way of putting it this is this is exactly fate. Right, in the way that that many cultures have had had it that the way you sometimes see like Greek and Roman ways of talking about the world, where everybody has their fate. It's laid out, you if you try to avoid it, it will just you'll just end up coming at it in a way that you didn't expect. Zack Jackson 36:38 Yeah, that's all edifice. Yeah, there. Yeah. Tim Maness 36:43 And that's, you know, it's not to say that that's, that that's a way of looking at God, that doesn't make sense, in a sort of abstract kind of way. But it's one that poses a lot of problems, especially for an Abrahamic view of God, where we want to talk about God as as loving, and as good. And in, it causes a lot of problems for the way we want to talk about the end of time. Right? We have this idea that at the end of time, God will will will wipe will wipe away every tear from people's eyes will make things okay. And that God will, to some extent treat people based on the choices that they've made during their lives. And if God has decided everybody's choices for them all along the line, then that makes a lot less sense. If people's, you know, if the will, the changes that people make in their lives. If the events that happen after those changes always exist, and the events that happen before those changes always exist, and they exist in the same way, then it doesn't seem like there's no particular reason to treat the events afterward as being more important than the events that happened before. Right? It's it's not as though if you're looking at a map of the US, right? But you would say, all right, everything that happens east of the Mississippi cancels out everything that happens west of the Mississippi, you know, that would be ridiculous. And if, if all events are laid out in time, the way, you know, places are laid out in space, then it seems ridiculous in the same way to talk about events, later, canceling out events that happened earlier. So there's, there's there's no particular reason for God to assign people to treat people differently based on on changes that they make. There's no sort of final victory of good over evil, because the evil always exists, it doesn't pass away. It's always there. In the same way that the good that God eventually brings him to be is always there. So even if you're if you even if you're not following these along these these be theorist philosophers in saying that, you know, the human personality doesn't really exist. The B theory causes all kinds of problems for for Abrahamic theology, and the the predestination list of theologians who would be happy to go along with the B theory. They don't have a lot of responses beyond Well, it's a mystery. You know, God see thing, God sees things differently. And it's not necessarily going to make sense to us. And that's something that we as theologians have to say a lot of the time because, you know, part of the way that we think about God is that yeah, God is different from us. And God does see things differently. But when you basically have to take that same explanation and apply it to literally everything in the way that we talk about God interacting with human beings, then speaking for myself, I don't find it very satisfying. It feels to me like, though it does make sense to say that there are there are things about God that we're not going to understand that we should, at a minimum, have some things that we can understand about the way God interacts with us in our own lives. If anything should be comprehensible to us, it seems like it should be that we should be able to understand the impact of what we do. Zack Jackson 40:38 Yeah, that we can't necessarily understand the nature the full nature of a being that exists outside of our experience our universe, but we should be able to at least understand our experience of that. Right. Tim Maness 40:57 Right. And especially if we're if retail was Ian Binns 41:01 gonna, yeah, please go ahead. I was gonna ask about in, you just alluded to it that, Zach, that, because again, it's still this is still cooking my brain here a little bit, but so the idea that God would exist outside of our understanding of time, right, like, even based on all this stuff that you're talking about here, Tim? Um, is that okay, in a theological way or not? Okay, I'm not permission, but what are your thoughts on approaching it that Tim Maness 41:31 way? Well, yeah, I mean, that's, that's, that's another big problem, that, that, that sort of exists at right angles to this one, right, you can have sort of different positions on that. And, and imagine it as impacting the way we think about time in different ways. Right? So people usually want to talk about God as knowing some things that exist in the future, right? Prophecy is, is assuming to some degree that God knows some things before they happen? And how are we going to reconcile that with the way that we think about time? Well, people have have proposed different things. You know, if the B theorists are right, and all events already exist, and that becomes very simple to explain, you know, God knows things. God knows everything that happens, because God sort of created it all. At you know, as it were, at the same moment, you know, God brought all that into existence together. With the great theologian, Augustine, the Christian theologian, Augustine, he, drawing on some, some sort of Greco Jewish ways of thinking about time, proposes that the time is this created thing. That, that, that there is no time, until God creates the universe. And when God creates the universe, you know, as God is saying, what it'd be like, then then time comes into being with things as as, as they start. And that would mean for Augustine, for instance, that God is is outside of time, in the same way that we say that God is outside of space. Right, that God doesn't you know, that God isn't located in space, you know, there's, there's not some place that you can go to the specialty that you've been, you know, getting the spaceship and travel to apply. And that's where God is, you know, this is one of the reasons why Star Trek five is a bad movie. And I'm wondering if Ian Binns 43:31 you're gonna do that. Tim Maness 43:34 And in the same way, there's, there's no particular moment where we're God is in time. And, and so, if God is outside of time, in that way, then then you could ask, you know, what is God's relationship to time like, there's this, this, this other Christian thinker on amblyseius, who has a way of thinking about time that has some subtle differences from Augustine, that we may or may not end up getting into he has this sort of famous image of God as it's the God's way of looking at time as is like a person in a watch tower looking down the road, right, that the person is not on the road, and what they see all events on the road from where they sit. So So God is sort of looking at time from outside and seeing it that way. And some people argue that God's knowledge of future events doesn't determine future events because God isn't really knowing them before they happen in a strict sense, because God isn't in the scheme of before and after. Zack Jackson 44:53 That sounds like the sorts of ways that they handle pre cognition in dune Is that the he doesn't actually see what will happen. He sees what they describe as a series of threads that all come out and branch off of each other of possible probable futures based on where things are. And so when he has visions, they're things that don't necessarily happen, but are possible happenings and then is then current actions can then determine whether or not those potential futures happen. Yeah, Tim Maness 45:30 you are it's also talked about that way in what is arguably the first time travel story. Christmas Carol. Where were we? Zack Jackson 45:43 Oh, man, yeah, I hadn't thought about the Christmas Carol is as a time travel, Tim Maness 45:48 we're screwed says to to the Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come Are these the shadows of things that will be your those might have been things that might be only. And, and there's a moment there are other ways of looking at at time in which God's relationship to time is like that, in which God is in time with us. And that the future doesn't exist for God either. And that, that God has, maybe you might say that God knows, to some extent what might happen, because God knows us really well. In the same way that that, you know, you might say, if your best friend, or if some close family member, well, if you put this person in this situation, I don't know for certain what they would do. But I bet they do this. That if you have really good knowledge of someone, you have an idea of how they would react in a given situation. And so maybe God's knowledge of the future is like that, where God has perfect knowledge of all of the physical conditions, and God has really good knowledge of our personalities. So God can say with a high probability, yeah, this is what's likely to happen. But it's up to you. Zack Jackson 47:06 When I was in seminary, I was a, I was in an arrogant little seminary, all army was all the things. And I had a professor who accused me of being more influenced by Greek philosophy than by the, you know, Christian theology, and which is fighting back against that Tim Maness 47:31 theologians have been accusing each other of since the first century. Zack Jackson 47:36 Sure, because it's true. Because what I was talking about with the the omnis of God, that God is omnipotent, so all powerful, omniscient, so all knowing omnipresent, so all prayer, all places, omnibenevolent, all loving these ideas of the omnis, which don't actually appear in Scripture, but that so very color, the way we think about God, and so what I was talking about what God being all knowing, so God knowing all of the things, and he challenged that and he said you where do you find that? And honestly, my basis of it was just the things that I was taught in Sunday school, that God these are the foundational characteristics of God, but not necessarily in Scripture other than in like the Psalms, which will say, you know, God, you've searched me, you know, me high and low, all those things. But he said, What if we follow instead, the line of thinking from Philippians? Two, and what we talked about kenosis, the emptying of God, and that instead of saying that God knows everything, what if you were to say that God knows what God chooses to know, that God is able to know everything, but in a way of as a way of interacting with finite beings, chooses instead to not know everything in order to interact with humanity. And so there is a kind of self emptying in order to enter into our world which, you know, if you imagine a three dimensional object, trying to interact in a two dimensional world, that three dimensional object would have to lose some of its three dimensional pneus and be emptied of its depth in order to interact with one of those. Tim Maness 49:21 Edwin Abbott's great book Flatland. Zack Jackson 49:24 Right, which ended up being I mean, that book was about economics, but ended up being a great illustration for all kinds of they also horribly Tim Maness 49:32 sexist, I should I should point that out. So be warned. If you go in if you go in there, there's some some really awful stuff about the female. Zack Jackson 49:43 Yeah, it's just a good illustration. But that's about Tim Maness 49:46 I want to be careful. I call it a great book. And I want to be careful about that because there are ways we did is a super bad book. Zack Jackson 49:55 That's kind of where where process theology comes up, that God is intimately involved. In the process of the unfolding of time that God has emptied God's self. And that's how God interacts in time and space is by leaving, the the timelessness and the unchanging pneus of the whatever imagined other dimensions and instead becoming, made flesh in in this existence. And that sounds really nice. Until I started learning about relativistic time and that there is no privileged present moment. And that so then in what moment, is God present in the now? At that point? Yeah, there is an acrobat now, actually, that does God exist in a black hole? Where the where time flows, so drastically different? does? Does God exist on the photons? Does God exist in the now of, you know, objects moving near the speed of light? It all kind of fell apart. And then yeah, wonderful narrative of God, growing and changing and loving and weeping with the death of the planet, all of that kind of fell apart, too. And I was sad to lose my beautiful theology, Tim Maness 51:07 you might be interested to know that there are philosophers and theologians out there who are struggling mightily to take that beautiful theology and make it compatible with relativity. Zack Jackson 51:22 Your being you being one of them? Tim Maness 51:24 Well, yeah, I mean, in my dissertation, I talked about a couple of different ways that people try to, to reconcile that, that theology was depends so much on pulling time with relativity. And that idea of God is in time with us, is one of the ones that I look at. It's, that's, that's a way of looking at things that is being defended by by, for instance, William Lane, Craig, and John Lucas. I think, you know, I think that the way that they go about or I should say, specifically, the way that Craig goes about, trying to make this work, and relativity leaves some, some really big unanswered questions. So I think it's, it's maybe the less satisfying, of, of the two. But when I was finishing the dissertation, but before I had time to really do the research, and, and incorporate this, I was seeing some stuff about other physical ways of looking at time, that made me think, maybe, if I were to sit down and, and look at this in a future project, there might be more to be said, for, for that, that sort of God in time, way of of dealing with relativity. So that that may be a future project. And I should also say that, that specifically that idea of, of God not knowing the future, because it's not, you know, is is more characteristic of Lucas's way of looking at things than Craig's, because I think Craig takes a lot of the advantages of that way of thinking and first, not the window, again, by insisting that God has to know everything that happens in detail. Um, Ian Binns 53:24 well, so, you know, I know we are slowly getting, you're starting to run out of time. I'm curious, how has the all this work that you've done the dissertation work, you just talked about, you know, future ideas, future things, you're curious about? How, if at all, has it impacted or influenced your personal theological journey? Tim Maness 53:48 Well, personally is exactly the word for it. So, that, that brings me I guess, to the other way of trying to reconcile flowing time with relativity, that I think is the more satisfying one which comes out of the work that the the theologian Barbara John Russell, who is working at the the graduate theological Union are in Berkeley, the director of the Center for theology of the natural sciences, is instantly been a great friend tonight, a great friend to me. The way that that he tries to reconcile this is to say that a lot of the problems that that relativity causes here or that we we think of relativity as causing come from taking the idea of a now and trying to extend it in space. Right, to say that there should be a single now that can encompass, you know, where I am here and where you are there and where somebody else is on Mars and we're aliens are the Andromeda galaxy right? whereas one of the things that relativity should tell us is that the idea of now is inseparable from the idea of here. The what you have is not so much a universal now that we meet, you can fall about it, but here now, so I have one particular now. And, you know, you in in North Carolina, have a slightly different one, and use Zack in eastern pa have a slightly different one. And, you know, the farther you are away, but the more different your now is. And that the philosophers who want to say that, you know that everything breaks down, because you can't fundamentally assign things to a past and present and future, the mistake that they're making is trying to take different nouns and combine them into one to say that what is real for me, is real T is real to you. Because we exist in this, you know, that because we can interact with each other. You know, for instance, if I'm on the phone with one of you, right, and you're looking out your window, and you're seeing the squirrels doing something weird out there, the way they do that, even if even if you're not talking to me about the squirrels that those squirrels, and what they're doing is real to me on the other end of the phone. You know, that's the way we normally think about things happening, right? That what's real to you where you are, is real to me where I am, even if I don't know anything about it. And what Russell and a few others is saying is that maybe this is another one of those ideas that relativity should force us to abandon. Maybe what we should be thinking about is, rather than then one, universal now that encompasses everyone, maybe there are a myriad of individual here now that go with each particular observer, in each particular reference frame, whatever it might be, and they don't line up with each other, but maybe they don't have to. Maybe, because, you know, the thing is that all you disagree, we can disagree about what happens at the same time, or in some cases about the order that events take place. But we will never disagree about the causality of events. Right. That's that's one of the things that the big the big caveat to this story about, we tell about how relativity changes everything up is that relative even in relativity, even with all of these shenanigans about time, relativity never mixes up the order of events that are causally related to each other, you can always agree, no matter what reference frame you're in, that the cause happens before the effect. So in the end, we have different perspectives, but they kind of come out in the wash. And even though you might know something that I would consider repeated, so you might know something now that I would consider the time that you would call now that I was considered to be in the future. One of the things about relativity is that you can't get that information to me, before it would come to me anyway. You can't get me you can't transmit a signal to me at the speed of light in such a way that I find out about that event with advanced knowledge. So maybe what we should do, in Russell's point of view is rather than saying that, that God exists in a single universal now that defines what now really means, the way Craig would have done it to say that God is with us, each of our individual mouths. And that that's God's way of, of perceiving the universe is by looking at it through the eyes, so to speak, more or less metaphorically of everything in the universe, that that rather than, than sort of looking down at what's happening on the stage of creation from the Royal box, so to speak, that God is seeing what happens through the eyes of each of the actors. And for that matter, potentially through the through the eyes of all the props and all the pieces of scenery and if Go to a couple of theologians, or a number of theologians who get called the Boston personalist. Boston because they worked at Boston University. We find that they have, even outside the framework of relativity already come up with a way of thinking about God's interaction with the creation. It looks a lot like this. One of them incidentally, Edgar Brightman was Dr. Martin Luther King's PhD advisor. So when he was becoming Dr. King, he was working with Edgar Brightman. So I think these two things kind of fit together in a really productive, generative way. The idea that, rather than personhood, being this distortion of a timeless, pure mathematical, non linguistic reality, maybe personhood, is the core of what is maybe our individual, different irreconcilable ways of looking at the world is a really important feature of how the world is. And that because God, who created the universe who brought the universe into existence is a person. Not exactly in the same way that we are, because God is infinite, and has all sorts of characteristics that as we talked about, we can't know about or even talk about very well. But But God's personhood is in some way analogous to ours. And so that personhood becomes a really important thing for us to keep in mind as we talk about existence. And that if we can't translate that personhood into mathematics, then that's okay. Because mathematics doesn't have to be the only tool that we use to describe how things are. Zack Jackson 1:01:57 Yeah, your explanation reminds me a lot of the way that Teresa of Avila saw the way that God interacts with people. Or she said, Christ has no body but yours, no hands, no feet on Earth, but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks compassion on the world, yours are the feet with which he walks to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses all the world, yours are the hands, yours are the feet, yours are the eyes, yours are the body. Christ has no body now on Earth, but you're right. Tim Maness 1:02:24 And even I think this works beautifully. Well, even talking about Christ's incarnation, you know, during those 30 Some years in, in Judea, right? That, that when God became incarnate speaking, he was a Christian, that it was as a particular human being, in a particular time and place, that God was this one guy with a very, who only walked around a very small area of the earth. Right, that God did all that God had to do in that incarnation, even with this perspective, that was very circumscribed. Very short, in terms of of time, and very localized in terms of space. And, and that's okay, that's, that's just how things are. Zack Jackson 1:03:16 Tim, as, as always, Tim, you've given me things to think about. You've given me scientific things to reread, as well as new perspectives on my own personal faith and theology to reconsider. So thank you again, for that. Any idea when this will all be turned into a book that everyone can read? Tim Maness 1:03:40 The ways that publishers are mysterious to us mere mortals? Ian Binns 1:03:45 Yes, this is true. Tim Maness 1:03:47 And so one of the things that they unfortunately don't necessarily teach you in grad school is hard to put together a book proposal. So that's something that I'm having to learn on my own. But hopefully, it shouldn't be too long. You know, though, of course as as, as CS Lewis has gotten the former bass line saying I call all time soon. Ian Binns 1:04:15 definitely agree with it. Yeah. Zack Jackson 1:04:18 Yeah, with a quote from Aslan. Tim Maness 1:04:20 Yeah. So it's been such a joy to to be a guest on the podcast and just to talk to you two guys, you're so great. And thanks. Zack Jackson 1:04:29 We'll have to have you back on again sometime soon to Tim Maness 1:04:32 say the word say the word and I am there and also then Zack Jackson 1:04:36 alright at yes then and there at the same time. Yes, it also not and oh wibbly wobbly timey. Why me? Yep. God bless you all.
Episode 98 This episode was originally recorded in early November and was set to be released at the end of December, but here we are at the end of January instead because time is a funny thing, isn't it? The moment you think you have a firm grasp on "now", it slips through your fingers. That's true both in terms of scheduling podcasts during the holidays and also understanding time from a relativistic perspective. Time might feel like it is moving at the same rate for everyone, but Einstein's theories (and later experimentation) prove otherwise. So without a universally agreed upon "now", how can we say anything true about a God who interacts within time? What good is repentance when the past and future are equally real? What about prophecy? Jesus' birth? Are we all destined for deism? Well, let's take some time to understand how relativity works first, and then we'll get to those (and many more) questions. Spoiler alert, we're going to talk about this one again in a special episode next time too because it's too much fun! Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are Kendra Holt-Moore 00:14 Kendra Holt-Moore, assistant professor of religion at Bethany college. And the thing I'm looking forward to in the next year is not being a first time first year Professor anymore, because the first year of teaching is really hard. Rachael Jackson 00:34 Rachael Jackson, Rabbi at Agoudas, Israel congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina. And the thing I am looking forward to in this coming year, is first a nine week sabbatical and the ability to travel because of vaccines. Ian Binns 00:56 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte, the first thing that popped my mind when thinking about what I'm looking forward to is going to see Rob Bell speak in Dallas, with my good buddy mark. February in February, Zack Jackson 01:14 Zack Jackson UCC pastor in Redding, Pennsylvania, and I am super excited for the launch of the James Webb Space Telescope, which I don't want to, I don't want to say that it's going to happen in a couple of days, because this episode is supposed to launch like three days before it's supposed to launch. Because I don't know, it was originally supposed to launch in 2007. So it's had a couple of delays. But it's going to make the Hubble look like a like a pair of binoculars, it is going to be able to show all kinds of super exciting things from the very beginning of the universe. And I cannot wait to see that. So I mentioned James Webb as well, because I think satellites are super cool, in general. And so I want to I want to start today with a story about a satellite, a very famous satellite, you may have heard of it. Its name was Sputnik. It was the very first human satellite we ever put up there. And back way back in 1957, the Soviets kind of surprised everyone and was like, hey, look, we've got the technology. And we did it. And everyone in the world kind of freaked out because they weren't sure if there was going to be nukes or anything like that, and alien technology or whatever. And because they it had never been done before. They had to prove to people that it actually was happening. And not that they were just making the whole thing up. And so they equipped Sputnik with a radio pulse. So it would go around the earth and be like me, beep, beep, beep, beep, so anyone on Earth could listen in and be like, Oh, look at that. It is up there. It's beeping at me. That's really neat. And so at the at Johns Hopkins, couple days later, October 7 1957, a couple of junior physicists were sitting around at lunch talking. And these two guys, these buddies, William Guyer, and George weissenbach, they were just talking with their friends. And we're really surprised to learn that no one at Johns Hopkins had bothered to listen for it, using their radio technology. Like, honestly, that seems like something that divino fancy scientists people should do. So wife and Bach was working on microwave radiation for his Ph. D. Program at the time. And so he had a decent radio in his office. And so the two of them went upstairs and just start messing around with it, waiting for Sputnik to crossover. And there was Beep, beep, beep, beep. And they had the clarity of mind to be like, hey, this seems like it might be a historical event, we should grab a cassette tape. And we should take this thing, just, you know, so we can show our kids, this is what Sputnik sounded like. And so they did, and they recorded it. And then the next day, they were like, I wonder if we can we can get this a little clearer. And so they they messed with the frequencies and got it so they could hear it really clearly. And one of the things that they noticed was that just like, you know, when you're when you're standing on the side of the street and a car is coming, and it goes and it kind of like the sound goes up and then it goes down. That's called the Doppler effect. That has to do with things that are emitting sound or light that is also moving in relationship to you. And so like if it's moving towards you, the sound waves or the the waves of light, they get compressed, because it's moving towards you. If it's moving away from you, they get spread out. So the sound would sound higher or lower as it's going. Same is true with like radio waves. So the sound coming from the radio waves, if you looked at it from like, the, the wave perspective was kind of doing b, b be, though wouldn't made that sound. And so they were like, Oh, this is really interesting, hey, Johns Hopkins, can we use your supercomputer for a minute, which I say supercomputer, it probably has had the computing power of like a ti 83. Now, it was one of the very first digital computers in the world. And so they used it to do some really complicated math. And were able to calculate Sputnik's orbit, and their look at its location, and where it was going. And were able to predict when and where it would come back, using just the what we call the Doppler shift of the the width of the radio waves. And that was kind of a novel thing to do. When they released their information. The Russians were like, what, come on, guys, we have this one thing, and you had to go and top US that was so rude. I think that's what the Soviet said, I don't speak Russian. So that was fun. And then Sputnik burned out. And that was no more. But then the next May, their boss came to them, and called called them into his office, which is always a good thing and said, Hey, remember that thing you did was Sputnik? Do you think it's possible to do that backwards? Could you do that in reverse? Like, if we had satellites, where we knew where they were, at the time in orbit, sending a pulse down to earth? Would you be able to calculate where the receiver is, if we knew where the satellites were? And they were like, well, I guess the math is kind of the same, it's just backwards. And thus, the transit system was born, the very first satellite navigation system, because the Navy had this problem where they had these nuclear submarines that had the nuke nuclear missiles on them in the Arctic, which is waiting to blow up Russia. But the, they were supposed to be secret. And so they couldn't use the traditional means of navigation because they didn't want to give away their location. And so they kind of were getting lost up there in the Arctic. And so the, the Air Force sent up an array of five satellites orbiting the Arctic, and every couple of hours, it would pass overhead. And then they could get a ping on their location. And they could correct their maps, and they would know where they were. And that was great. And that was wonderful. And then we thought, I wonder what else we can use this technology for? And so the global positioning satellite system started to get dreamed up together, like, what if we took that, and we made a whole array of satellites, up in orbit, all sending pings down to earth, and we could triangulate, given the pings and the locations of a couple of them, and be able to tell where all kinds of things are airplanes. And, and, and, and like troops. And this is the military, they're always thinking about war stuff. And so what they would need to have a real time local navigation system was that the clocks on Earth would need to be synced with the clocks in the satellite. That would be real important if we're going to do real time navigation. So they have these really, really accurate atomic clocks, that one is in on Earth, and one is in orbit. And that was great. Except for one problem. There was this guy, you may have heard of him. He's kind of a big deal name is Albert Einstein. And about 60 years beforehand, he had proposed this crazy thing called general relativity, after his theory of special relativity, which suggested that Isaac Newton's laws, which had worked very well, by the way for the past, like 300 years, which were the laws, which helped them to get the satellites in orbit in the first place, it didn't work so well, when you were talking about the effects of gravity. So in a larger level, Newton's Laws kind of stop working, in particular, his theory of time, and the way that time moves, see a part of relativity stated that one's relationship to gravity affected the passage of time, which was a very counterintuitive thing, and at the time in 70s When this was getting put up, there were still testing. It seemed like it was passing all the tests general relativity was, was passing all of these tests. But they still weren't entirely convinced. And some of the scientists on this GPS project thought that we were going to disprove Einstein. And so we should just put the clocks up there, up there in the satellites, and the other scientists were like, no, if we put the clocks up there as they are, and not adjust them in any way for relativity, then they're going to be out of sync. And so they couldn't agree internally. And these satellites are very expensive. And back in the 70s, it was very, very expensive to send the satellite into space, it's still very expensive, but it was much more back then. And so they had, they kind of did this interesting trick. A sort of cheat, if you will, to appease both sides, and to be able to tell once and for all, if time actually does move differently, the further you get from Earth, in that they sent it up with just normal atomic clock. But they also had a sort of switch, where they could flip that switch, and then there was a little computer inside that would then adjust the time on the clock to then send back the corrected time to Earth. So they sent it up. And they let it be up there for about 20 days going around and discovered that yeah, it shifted the time in orbit past differently than the time on Earth. Seven microseconds per day, which I don't know, a microsecond doesn't seem like a whole lot of time. So seven microseconds per day of drift. But in terms of GPS, that's a drift of 10 kilometers per day, if not corrected. So one day of the satellites being up there, and they're useless. Because time travels, passes differently in orbit than it does on Earth. Yeah, Rachael Jackson 12:14 so incredible. Like, yeah, that's subjective, Zack Jackson 12:17 like you said, not just a fun theory, Ian Binns 12:20 the seven microseconds thing, when you first say that, I'm just gonna like, oh, wow, what did he do? But the ramifications for those of us on the ground? That's just wow, like, I did not know that. That's crazy. Zack Jackson 12:36 Yeah, the, the closer you are, so that, it's because there's less gravity less of Earth's gravity, the farther you get from the center of Earth. And so time, time will pass faster. On in orbit, the closer you get to the gravitational well, the slower time will pass. But because these things are relative to where they're being observed, I always get that backwards as to if you were on the earth, looking at the satellite, versus if you were on the satellite looking at the Earth, actually, relative to the Earth's age, you know, a couple billion years old, Earth's core is actually two and a half years younger than its surface. For what it's worth, you go. So now every single satellite that's in orbit, every single computer every single time, a piece that is up in orbit, and every all of the robots on Mars and the satellites flying out into deep space, all of that has to compensate for the fact that gravity affects time. That time passes differently for different people, for different observers in different places in different gravity wells. Depending on one's mass on one's gravity on one's velocity, time will pass differently. So GPS only works because time is weird. So in a manner of speaking, Albert Einstein is the father of Pokemon GO and so for that we give thanks Kendra Holt-Moore 14:27 what a storyteller you are Zack to be able to craft to craft a narrative that leads to a conclusion. Ian Binns 14:35 And to me, I love it, you know, so that we all roads Zack Jackson 14:38 lead to Pokemon, right? That's but that's a lot to take in. And there's a lot of moving pieces to that and there's a lot of confusing counter intuitive things about how relativity bends space and time and what are the implications of the fact that there is not a solid steady passage of time. Which means there is no preferred present moment that the past and the future in the present are all on a spectrum instead of one, instead of us always being in the present and the past in the future being always somewhere else, the implications of that, and even understanding how that happens and why that happens. And all of that is a lot to unpack. So let's take a 15 second break, and take a breath. And be thankful that we can time 15 seconds unless you're on a spaceship, going half the speed of light, and then this could take a lot more than 50. All right, I want to tell you a quick thought experiment, that I'm adapting from one of Einstein's thought experiments, because I find any time we talk about things happening on trains, and lasers and things like that, in thought experiments to be hard to, to wrap my mind around. So I want to imagine for a second that we have a basketball robot. And basketball bot is an awesome robot, and he's predictable. And the things he does happen very predictably, he's got a hand that reaches out, it's one meter above the ground, it can bounce a basketball in one second. And it's steady and repeatable. You know, bum, bum, bum, bum, he's basketball bot, he's a robot, it's, it's easy to do. So you're watching basketball bot, as he's bouncing the ball in the airport. And, you know, one second, one second, one second, one meter, one meter, one meter, one meter, one meter, one meter, and then you and a basketball bot, because you're going to baggage claim, you walk on to the, to the moving sidewalk. And so you're standing there next to basketball bot, who is still bouncing the basketball because he's programmed to bounce the basketball. And he's still going one meter down, one meter up, one meter down one meter up in one second. And that hasn't changed for you. But the person standing on the side watching this strange basketball bot, bounce a basketball in the airport, on the people walk thing is not seeing the basketball goes straight down and straight up. Because we've added a velocity in another direction. So if that is moving sufficiently fast, while he's bouncing straight up and down, with a person on the side is seeing is really it bouncing in an angle, and then bouncing up in an angle, because of the way that they're seeing. And so in classic physics, that's not a problem, the old heads of physics, they were talking about the same thing, that just means you have now added velocity in a separate direction. And so now there's more speed to be had. Right? Speed is just distance divided by time. So you know, we're just adding a bit more distance if you're moving sideways, as well. So it's speeding up. According to the person on the outside, which is fine. Basketball can go faster, because it can write, there's no limit to the speed of basketballs. So basketball bot is not a problem. He's a great guy, now, laser basketball man, robot guy who is doing the same thing, except instead of bouncing a basketball, he is bouncing a photon, up and down, up and down, one meter up and down, up and down. You're standing next to him, that photon is moving at the speed of light, because that's what they do, up and down, up and down, up and down, up and down, bouncing off a mirror coming back up to his hand. And that's fine. So then he goes on the people walk, moving sidewalk thing, and a person on the outside now sees if it's moving sufficiently fast, it not going straight up and down, but following the same vector that bounces sideways and up, which means that it would have to have accelerated in one direction. But we know that the speed of light is a constant, and you can't go faster than the speed of light. So how is it then that to the person on the outside, it appears that it has moved faster than the speed of light, magic. Speed is just distance divided by time. And the speed has to be constant. That means that time then has to change. If all the mathematics are going to work out, fine. Then if distance changes, so does time. And so when we're talking about things that obey the speed of light, like a photon that can't go faster than time then starts to get wibbly wobbly. So that's the that's the insight that comes from special relativity is that Newtonian physics works really well, from the perspective of your everyday life. Right? Bouncing a basketball, Newtonian physics works great. But when you break it down to things that either are massive, like planets, or that move incredibly fast, like light, then it starts to break down and relativity takes over. And so we start to extrapolate outward from that, and finding out that time doesn't move the same for everyone, time is dependent on your frame of reference on your velocity on your mass on your, on your gravitational pull. And so for most of us, that's not going to matter. Most of us are going to live our whole lives in roughly the same gravity, well, at roughly the same velocity, we're not going to be traveling near the speed of light, we're not going to have to worry about this. Right? So why even talk about it? Kendra Holt-Moore 21:10 Why even talk about it? Ian Binns 21:13 Because it's really fun. I mean, there's more reasons than that, obviously, but I've always found this stuff just quite fascinating. Blows my brain just Zack Jackson 21:23 gonna end the episode right there. Just no reason to talk about it's not gonna affect us show. Rachael Jackson 21:32 Let's move on with our day. Zack Jackson 21:34 But it does kind of bust the whole way we think about past present future, doesn't it that, that there is this constant flow of time from past to future, that past is gone. It's just a memory. The present is where we live, and the future is what's coming, hasn't happened yet. And like, that way of thinking, permeates all of our religious tradition, the way we think about God, the way we think about God's interaction with humanity is all based in this there was the past, it calls the present. And now the present will influence the future, especially in Christianity, because we are an eschatological religion, which is fancy theological ways of saying we are a religion of the end, we have people who are looking forward to the end to the redemption of all to the sort of an end goal of things being made, right? That only works if there is a progression of time. How do you save something if the end and the beginning and the middle are all the same? How does God interact in time? Do we believe that God is time less? And if God is outside of the flow of time, as we experience it, then which one is God's preferred time God's preferred now? Like there's some beautiful theologies like process theology, which believes with which teaches that God and creation are intrinsically intertwined, and that God is growing and changing and moving with creation. And I love that, and that God doesn't know the future, and God is moving along with us. But it doesn't work. When you realize that there is no preferred present moment, and everything breaks down on the macro level. You don't for example, if you and your friend were in in twin spaceships, and you were hanging out near a black hole, and your buddy got a little bit too close, and then got sucked into the event horizon, from your perspective, you could stay there for the rest of your life and watch them slowly fall into the black hole. They would just be falling and falling and falling forever. But from their perspective, in an instant, they would be instantly spaghettified which is the actual technical term for when you get sucked into a black hole and get pulled down atom by atom into single strand of be of existence spaghettified we get a five spaghettified you can quote me on that. That's, that's the science word. Well, so Ian Binns 24:26 I've always felt like in, you know, when you come to the notion of God, that just seemed limiting to me that we could only think of God as a being that is limited to our notion of time, to the human notion of time, right. Like, I would like to think that there is a God that God is more powerful than that, right? There's not there's not a limiting factor there. If that makes any sense. Yeah. No, like one man literally interpret, you know, the story of great the creation story, or stories and, and Genesis, when they see that, you know, on the first day this happened second day Ebola seventh day God rested. And people like See, look, it happened in one week. I'm kinda like you, like really like you can't you struggle with the notion that it's bigger than that like that God is limited to our personal understanding our own individual understanding of what a week is, and what a day is like that just to me that that kind of puts God into a into a bubble. Right? That's like, the only way I can understand God is by God is in a life like mine. And I would like to think that if God does exist, that God is outside of that mentality, that there's God's not limited in that situation. That's just how I view it. Zack Jackson 26:01 So then how would a being outside of the flow of time interact within the flow of time? Ian Binns 26:07 I don't know. You know, when I die, and if there is a God, and I get a chance to meet God, that may be one of my questions. How do you do that? Can you teach me that trick? I mean, I know. But I just I don't know. Yeah, I feel like that's another good thought experiment. Rachael Jackson 26:28 Man, please. Yeah. One of the ways that we've sort of wrestled with this idea, I shouldn't say we, that I have wrestled with this idea of time, and God. I've heard the idea that is, God is all good, all knowing, all powerful, and all time. That doesn't work for my theology, when I look at the world around me. So it's like, Okay, which of these variables Am I comfortable eliminating? And I was not comfortable with eliminating that God is all good. That that that feels really terrible to think that God is not good. So and I'll spare you all the details of going through that that journey, where I end up for this conversation is that if God is all time, perhaps God is the present, as we know it, that it's, it is in our time, that God is of all times, but we experience time in a linear fashion. And so that's where God exists with us is in our times. And so God has the ability to move through time space continuum. Great. I don't and so I can experience God in this time. And I employ that in one of the prayers that I say where we, we ask for healing. And at the end, I always say, made those in need find healing in a time near to us. I don't if we're praying to God, I want God to know that I don't want this on a god time scale. I would like this on our time scale. So I, I agree with you and that there it seems confining to have God exists in a singular time frame. But I myself do exist in that time frame going back to Zach's point of like, no Newtonian physics, pretty much my life not gonna break out in Newtonian physics, I don't really need to think too much on this. So from a theological standpoint, I say, Okay, God experiences or relativity in a way that I don't. So it's my question then have to wrestle with myself of how do I then have God in my timeline? In my time, so I don't know if that makes any sense. But that's, that's sort of how I answer that question. Kendra Holt-Moore 29:02 So the way that I think about alternative, like, forms of guard, like the kinds of theologies that I think are really compatible with this, you know, revolution in the understanding of time, it I think that mystical theologies become so much more kind of intriguing, and it you know, it's like, it does. Accepting, like, Einsteinian mechanics of time and you know, mystical theologies. It requires an acceptance of, well, I think most of the time it requires an acceptance of a non theistic version of God, or like a non anthropomorphic version of God. And so what I mean when I say those things is, you know, A version of God that that's not like, made in the image of like human beings are human ish versions of God, you know the God with arms and legs and a face. And that's really hard I think for a lot of people to kind of let go of, especially if, if we're talking about like the monotheism 's of like Judaism, Christianity and Islam. I mean, and really like the most of the major world religions that talk about God, there is something that tends to become very like humanoid about God, but that's never like there's always mystical strains of theology in, in religions. And so the, the ones that kind of come to mind that I think are are like some of the first ones that I thought of, and I know if Adam was here, this is probably something that he would bring up too is like Paul Tilex. Image of God as the ground of being. And Tillich kind of uses this phrase ground of being to, to be the stand in for God. And it kind of replaces this very anthropomorphic version of God with a vision of God that is, like a more like a foundation. And it's more like this stable, like, stable yet creative. floor at the bottom of all, all that is. And you know, there's, there's a lot in Tillich in theology and talking just about the ground of being if Adam listens to this and is like, Well, Adam, should have been here Zack Jackson 32:01 wasn't the Paul Tillich society? At one point? Kendra Holt-Moore 32:05 Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's true. But you know, that's like, that's your kind of letting go. It's a very, it's a more like, abstract kind of way of thinking about, like, what God is, but I actually, I think my personal favorite, like mystical kind of vision of God actually comes from a mystic named Nicholas of Cusa. And whenever I was, in my master's degree, I took a class called Nicolas of Cuza about this, like mystic theologian, and I remember Reading some of his primary works. And there was a chapter that was all about his, his, like, you know, his, kind of like systematic theology. And but there was a few pages in this one chapter that just had like math in it was like, what is happening? What, why I like circled all the math and wrote in the margins of my textbook, like, Excuse me, like, No, I think I even like wrote out a very dramatic like, no, with multiple exploits, XSplit exclamation, and was just like, This is not what I want to be, like thinking about when I'm trying to like foster a spiritual experience. And, and I have a, you know, a couple years later, after that class, I took a class called science literacy with my doctoral advisor. And in that class, it was like, one of the most fascinating and also difficult classes that I've taken, because it's like a crash course in physics. And like, you know, we talk about special theory of relativity, general theory of relativity, quantum mechanics, like all of that, and what are the philosophical and like theological implications of those things. And it was during that class that I had to kind of go back to the theology of Nicholas of Cusa. And look at my margins, in the notes on the pages where there is mass and the universe and God, and then I just like, it made sense to me. I was like, I still, I'm just like, not someone who naturally thinks in a very mathy way, and so I always find that challenging. But there's also like, the only times that I have been able to have been able to, like have an experience of all thinking about math is when I'm thinking about the implication of, like, math on like, I don't know, like, like metaphysics or like the structure of the universe. And so, the point being that Nicolas of Cusa talks about the enfolding and unfolding of, of God or of of the universe, there's, there's this breath metaphor Almost of this enfolding everything kind of collapsing into one unit, one like period, one point. And in that enfolding every, like you and I, and all that is, we are one, it's like a oneness. And then the unfolding is this like, you know, it's the, the exhale or like the other side of the breath it unfolds. And again, we all kind of diverge into particularities and we have our, you know, our specific to kind of tie it back to our conversation wells of gravity, where we exist. But we also keep in folding and unfolding. So there's like this dual experience of like, oneness, and specificity and like divergence. That is just like, I think such a beautiful image of like wholeness, and like, it's like both the duality and oneness that I just think is like such a perfect, like, non theistic kind of theological representation of these like time dynamics that force us to think beyond, you know, Newtonian mechanics. So that's kind of what comes to mind for me. Zack Jackson 36:42 Well, if you're into sacred mathematics, and mysticism, you would love by Sagaris. They were all about that life, almost worshipping numbers and mathematics, thinking of it as this ticket in small doses. You also if you're a pipe factory, and you can't eat beans, that was that was against their religion to Kendra Holt-Moore 37:03 work for me. Yeah. Zack Jackson 37:05 I think he thought that the beans in humans came from the same source. And so it was a bit of cannibalism. Who knows you're that part about Ian Binns 37:16 Sagaris when I was studying that, but Zack Jackson 37:18 you mostly just hear about the whole triangle thing, right? You don't hear about the toggery worship numbers. Ian Binns 37:23 It's been a long time since I took that really cool history science class. Zack Jackson 37:27 So yeah, it's been a couple 1000 years since the Python, Koreans. But we're at Ian Binns 37:34 that times all relative, right? Zack Jackson 37:36 Well, yeah. I mean, how do we think of time typically, we think of it like, like those moving sidewalks at the airport, right? That we're all standing on it. And we're all moving at the same rate, or like a flow of a river, that we're all moving together along the same rate. But we found out that you can kind of move on that river, you can paddle one way or the other, and you can slow down or speed up your position in time in that river. And so it time kind of then acts more like a frozen river with kids ice skating all over it, rather than a group of people on a lazy river in their tubes, all moving at the same speed. So it does, I think this has been my problem to Kandra is that I'm fine with almost all of these weird things in about relativity and time. But it hurts my conception of a real time theistic God like the God that is in the moment with me right now. It makes that harder to stomach harder to conceptualize. You know, if if, if God doesn't have a preferred present moment, then like, Oh, okay. Then. Kendra Holt-Moore 39:03 Yeah, yeah, implications of that are really like they are really far reaching for for Christianity and, and Judaism in Islam, I think in particular. And it's, you know, I think there are also people who maybe, and I don't know if this like kind of resonates with your experience, maybe not Zack, but people who kind of like if you kind of asked them or forced them to explain their theology, they might they might actually say something that sounds more non theistic. But in their day to day lives, they kind of like re impose a theistic like face on there, like non theistic theology, like it's, it's, it's, you know, again, that's not that's, it's almost like Like, I don't know that this is like the appropriate way to frame it but like a second naivete Zack Jackson 40:06 almost of like, yes. What we're doing physics Kendra Holt-Moore 40:09 come to Yeah, like if you're if your theology if it's important to you for the theology and the physics to kind of fit together then maybe that's like what you do. But for like, you know, religious and spiritual community and talking day to day, you still use language that has like familiarity and like personhood, and I don't like this is something that people will argue about, because some people think that's like a disingenuous, and I get that. But I also, I think it's just important for the way that people relate to each other and to other things in the world and to relationships. So I actually find that completely, like understandable and normal. Zack Jackson 40:57 It's like my day to day theology is Newtonian. But my, if I'm thinking about it, my actual theology is Einsteinian. Right? That right? It makes sense in the day to day to have an eminent theistic God. But it makes sense in the quiet moments where I'm thinking, to think about a, a more universal presence than a theistic imminent God. And I think we do that all the time. With our theologies, we've got, we've got different types of theologies that apply to different situations, the theology that you have when you're suffering is different than the theology you have when you're not. And we just, we all do, and that's fine. Like I don't at like funerals and stuff, people always talk about how that person has gone on. And now they're watching over me and blah, blah, blah. But like, there's no part in the New Testament that talks about that, there that the New Testament teaches that you die, you die, and you go on the ground, and your soul, your spirit, all of that is over. And it's done, until the Second Coming, and the resurrection of the dead. And then everyone comes back together, there is no, like waiting up in heaven, and playing a harp and watching you as you live your life. There is none of that in the New Testament, but we all just pretend like it's there. Because it is comforting to us in the moment, even if we don't really believe that so and so was watching us from afar, we like to believe that it's true. You know, I think we do that practically. And it's okay to admit that as a way of contextualizing our theology in the moment. Rachael Jackson 42:27 And it's and it can be used as a coping mechanism. Yeah, theology has coping. Zack Jackson 42:33 So when this episode airs, it's going to be like, I don't know, two weeks from Christmas or so. Which is, I don't know, sort of one of the important parts of of the Christian year. It's like, this moment in Christian theology where just a little, a little bit, a little bit. It's this moment in Christian theology, where it's like, God has been working through people for eons, and moving through the cycles of time, and nations and empires and kings and prophets and priests and individuals. And then, at some point, God says, Alright, kids, you sit down, I'm gonna take care of this for a minute, and comes in and breaks through, and there's this. Countless theologies that have tried to explain how God becomes human. How do we break this barrier between the infinite in the finite this, this this, we call it kenosis, this emptying of divinity in order to become humanity. I mean, there's none of them actually make a whole lot of sense. Logically, there are, which you sort of have to have to get all mystical and non dualistic before anything makes any sense? If you really think about it for too long, in terms of the Incarnation. But it's this breaking through a moment that we celebrate, in which something that is entirely other breaks into time and into history, that which is universal becomes particular, that God has to become a single person in a single time with a single genetic makeup who lives a single life. And there's some, I mean, that's helpful to some extent, to imagine that in our day to day lives, I also wonder then, if we were to draw that outward, if we were to say that time and space are connected, are one in the same. And just like, I believe that San Diego still exists, even though I'm not there. I also believe that three BC exists, even though I'm not there. And so in that way of thinking about time, that the past is not something that is gone, but it's just something that I'm not experienced. In saying that the incarnation the breaking in of God into the world is something that is happening in an infinite present moment in what we would consider 1000s of years ago. And so in all of these places in which God is breaking into time, those are places that are infinitely being broken into time. And you can think then of the final redemption of the world less as something to look forward to, and something that as opposed to something that we're living into something that we're experiencing the ripples of redemption, the way that you would experience gravitational waves of a black hole collisions. But these just musings of ways that I like to try to think about things that I have no real theological grounding, and I'm trying to be careful not to draw those conclusions too far as just rereading a paper I wrote in seminary, I posted it to y'all, it's fine. No one reads, that's 20 pages. And the the, the final conclusion I made was just drawn way too broadly outward, because I got excited about the implications of a God that breaks into time infinitely. And the ripples of redemption that can get flow through time through single redemptive acts, which I don't know if I would draw those points anymore, but they were fun to dwell on back then. So I should say, to wrap things up, we don't actually know why we experienced the flow of time. All of these revelations that come out of relativity are counterintuitive. It doesn't feel like the past and the future are real, it feels like they are ideas. And the present is the only moment we've ever experienced, that's our lived reality. That's the way our brains have formed. And for some reason, the way that we experience the dimension of time, whether that's just a way that our consciousness adapted to be able to function well, or if there is some divine reason that we experience a single moment instead of an entirety of moments. Nobody really has a good explanation. So a lot of this sort of thinking is theoretical, and a lot of it is hard to wrap your head around. And I think it's probably okay to have a an eminent theology that works on the Newtonian level of day to day life, as well as having a sort of what if kind of theology in which you are imagining the implications of something that has implications but are hard to fathom in our everyday life? If that makes sense. Do you think that's okay? Or is that disingenuous? No, I think that's good. If Adam were here, he would argue with me that it would be disingenuous, but again, Adam is not here to defend himself Ian Binns 48:23 that since so vault. Zack Jackson 48:27 So I would just like to end this segment by saying that I am right and Adam is wrong, and there is nothing that he can do or say, to correct me. And if he would like to correct me, he will have to do so in a future episode when he leads. So there Rachael Jackson 48:51 so today's today's day down the wormhole, minute story from the Talmud. This comes from the Babylonian Talmud in Tractate to a neat around page 23. That's in case anyone wants to check my citation or read the entire story. There's a character a person however, you want to understand the people in these texts, whose name is Honi. And there's quite a few stories about him. And so one of the stories that I want to tell you about is the day that Honi slept. And as a tired parent, it just sounds amazing. Story. One day, Connie, the circle maker was traveling along a road and he saw an old man planting a care of tree when he stops and asks him, how long will it take for this Tree to fully bear fruit. And the man replies 70 years. Astonished Honi asks, Do you think you will live another 70 years? There, the man replies calmly. I found care of trees growing when I was born, because my forefathers planted them for me, so I to plant them for my children. Thereupon, Connie sat down to have a meal, and sleep overcame him. As he slept, a rock formation grew around him hiding him from sight, and he slept and he slept. And he slept. He continued to sleep for 70 years. When he woke up, he saw what it look like to be this same man gathering beautiful fruit fully bloomed a fully mature fruit from a Carib tree. Astonished Honi then asks, Are You the man who planted this tree? No. The man replies, I am his grandson. That's when Connie realizes that he has slept for 70 years. Connie goes home and finds that his son has died, but his grandson was still alive. And so he says to the members of his household, I am Honi the circle maker, but they didn't believe him, because it had been 70 years since when he had passed and vise been seen. Since then he left the house and he went to the Beit Midrash the study hall, and he announces, I am Honi the circle maker, but no one believed him and they didn't give him any respect. So Honee an utter despairs, praise for Divine Mercy. And he dies. To this Raava another person of the time says, For this reason people say give me companionship, or give me death. And it is for this reason that we gravitate towards others. That though time might pass we experience it in a linear fashion that it is the people with whom we have connections with it is a way of thinking about the past providing for the future but really living in these moments that make it worthwhile. That is what Honi the circle maker can teach us from his sleep of 70 years. Zack Jackson 52:52 May we all sleep for 70 years.
Episode 97 Today we are joined by psychologist, pastor, professor, podcaster, and the most interesting person you will meet today, the Rev. Dr. Vikki Gaskin-Butler. We talk about how womanism and what the psychology of religion has to offer at the intersection of class, race, and gender. Does religion actually make us better or should we spend our weekends at the gym instead? How do we raise emotionally children? How do we become emotionally healthy adults? Let's talk about it! The Healing the Human Spirit Podcast https://anchor.fm/vikki-gaskin-butler Rev. Dr. Vikki Gaskin-Butler is a licensed psychologist (clinical and health psychology) and ordained clergy person. She received her bachelor's degree in psychology from Spelman College and her Master of Science and Ph.D. in psychology from the University of Florida. She also received a Master of Divinity degree from the Candler School of Theology at Emory University. Today's guest has served as a psychologist in university counseling centers, clinic director in an interfaith-based counseling center, and as director of a university psychology clinic. She has supervised numerous students in pursuit of psychology, mental health counseling, and social work degrees. She has led clergy consultation groups and served as a consultant with church/church-affiliated and secular organizations. In addition, she has served as a minister of education and an associate pastor in local churches. Our guest draws on her knowledge of human potential from her experience as a psychologist and ordained clergy person to support the psychological, spiritual, and physical well-being of all people. Through her first-hand knowledge of life as a wife, mother, musician, professor, clinician, and minister, she has the insight to support the needs of adults, including performing artists, clergy, and health professionals. In her words: "My passion is to constantly move toward my own divine potential. Throughout this journey, I have experienced struggle, doubt, grief, joy, peace, and all of the emotions that make us human. These emotions and the experiences connected with them have made me more whole as I followed the thread of healing to freedom. These emotional experiences have also created within me a deep well of compassion for others as they journey on their paths to health and wholeness." Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:04 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. Ian Binns 00:12 Our guest today is a licensed psychologist, both clinical and health psychology and ordained clergy person. She received her bachelor's degree in psychology from Spelman College and her Master of Science and PhD in Psychology from the University of Florida. She also received a master of divinity degree degree from the Candler School of Theology at Emory University. Today's guests who served as a psychologist in University Counseling Centers clinical director and interfaith based Counseling Center, and as director of a university psychology clinic. In addition, she has served as a minister of education and associate pastor in local churches. Our guests are all in her knowledge of human potential from her experience as a psychologist, an ordained clergy person to support the psychological, spiritual and physical well being of all people through her firsthand knowledge of life as a wife, mother, musician, Professor, clinician and minister. She has the insight to support the needs of adults, including performing artists, clergy and health professionals. We're very excited to welcome to the show Dr. Vicki T. Gaskin, Butler. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 01:15 Thank you. I'm so excited about being here. Welcome. Ian Binns 01:18 Welcome. Welcome. Okay, so I've done my part. You guys. Go ahead. What? Zack, you have to edit that out. Zack Jackson 01:28 Oh, yeah. Mike drop. He hands down. He's gonna go home now. Oh, you are home? Kendra Holt-Moore 01:35 Yes. Oh, yeah. It's nice to have you at this Vicki. Um, do you and he in one or both of you want to share a little bit about like your connection? How did you meet? And how did we get, you know, how, how did we get to this moment where we get to have you on to talk to you and ask you about, you know, the work that you do. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 02:02 Okay, so I can tell you my said, and I think Ian should tell you his side as well. Ian Binns 02:09 Sounds good. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 02:10 My husband introduced me to Ian via email. But before that, he told me about Ian. And he said, She's really cool. And he's doing some really cool stuff. And I know you'll be interested in it. And so he told me about your podcast, and you told me about the fellowship you had. And so then I started being nosy and looking around and try to find out who Ian was. And my husband said, Yeah, I told him about you. And y'all should get in touch. And I think you'll he'll, he'll be a good guest on your podcast, which I thought was great, because now I want all of you to be guest on my podcast, just just so you know. And Zack Jackson 03:04 on your podcast. You want to plug your podcast, Vikki Gaskin-Butler 03:09 I just started it's called Healing the human spirit. And it covers any topic, literally any topic that's salient for human beings. Because I I've said this a million times, but for me, as a psychologist and a clergy person. I use my dad's phrase that I heard him say when I was like in high school and middle school, inextricably intertwined. Psychology and religion for me, and spirituality are inextricably intertwined. And so the podcast is really about all kinds of things that affect our human spirit and how we can use any occurrences in our lives to help us heal. Whether those things are quote unquote, labeled as good things, bad things or in between. Kendra Holt-Moore 04:06 When When could people expect the first episode? Vikki Gaskin-Butler 04:11 Actually, the first episode happened a month ago because I launched before I was ready. And my husband was my first guest and he we talked about gosh, we talked about the Coronavirus, science, the Coronavirus and religion. So we talked about those three topics because he is a science educator and undergraduate degree in physics. So, we have lots of interesting conversations around, Kendra Holt-Moore 04:42 I bet. And it's so fun to talk to people who cast those wide nets, which sounds like that's exactly what you're doing in your work and what the podcast is like, everything that matters for human beings and human flourishing, let's just tackle it all. So that's great. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 05:06 My topic though, is science and religion. So I'm gonna try not to be too heavy on that. science, religion and spirituality, oh, Kendra Holt-Moore 05:16 we invite that. Zack Jackson 05:18 I mean, heavy. I'm gonna jump right into that. That is literally what this podcast is about. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 05:25 So, I want to I do want to cover lots of other things, but that, as you can see, I'm here today with you. It's my favorite. Kendra Holt-Moore 05:35 No, I'm excited to hear more about that. Um, and was there anything that you wanted to share about your meeting? Ian Binns 05:43 Yeah, so, um, Vicki's husband, Malcolm and I have known each other for several years, since we're both science educators. And we got to know each other in one of our professional conferences, and just would stay in touch. And every time we see each other, we'd sit down and hang out and just talk and catch up and stuff. And then he became or was one of the finalists for the Dean position for my college, college education, and ended up getting the job. And when he came on the interview, I was actually we were going to be recording an episode while he was there. And he was really interested in the podcast again, because he knew about it. And then that's when he told me about Vicki and said, I think y'all need to meet because you guys have similar interests. And so when Vicki and I met, and we've only met like this one time, and, you know, I remember after I hung up, my wife was another room, and she knew that I was meeting Vicki, and she's like, Wow, you guys hit it off beautifully. I was like, Yeah, that was a lot of fun. So, um, so I knew we had to get her on. And yeah, as I said, Before, we were recording I think Vicki and I, once they move up here in a couple months are going to become good friends, because she just has a lot to Zack Jackson 06:59 offer. Yeah, Ian texted all of us almost immediately. And like, like he had just met the president or something. And he's like, yeah, oh, my gosh, you have to meet this person. She's a wonderful. Ian Binns 07:11 Now, so I was sharing some of the things you mentioned. And everyone was like, Oh, well, amen. We got to do this. And so. So yeah, and it was just neat. It was fun for me, you know, with Malcolm getting hired. And, you know, as my next Dean, to have a science educator, as the dean, but then to realize, you know, and I know that Malcolm is a person of faith as well. But then when he introduced me to Vicki, and your areas of interest and expertise, I just knew right away, we would get along. Well, so. Kendra Holt-Moore 07:43 Yeah, that's awesome. Yeah, vier, it's exciting. Yeah. So So Vicki, I guess the first the first thing that I want to ask about your work is maybe more of a general question, just so you can say a bit and like, let everybody know, you know, what it is that you do? Generally? So do you just want to tell us, like, what it means to, to do this work as a clinician, like the kind of intersection of your various roles as a clinical psychologist, and, you know, your work in religion and spirituality? Like, what? What does that look like for you? What are your research interests? And yeah, anything that you want to share about that to get us started? Vikki Gaskin-Butler 08:24 So when I was talking with Ian, I told him I call myself a womanist, psychologist of religion. And why is because I did my PhD in Psychology before I went to seminary, because I hadn't never had any intention of going to seminary. And if any of you know about some clergy people, it's like, never doing that. And for me, it was, I even know I grew up. I grew up in a religious family. In terms of, there are so many people who are clergy in my family that I would start giving you a list and there will be too many of them to name but I'm including my dad. And as a result of that, I figured there were enough clergy people in my family, so they didn't need me to be clergy. Nobody needed me to be clergy because they had a cover. So I wanted to become a psychologist, and I did and actually is partially from witnessing my dad doing his work. And, and I'll tell you, just a quick, quick story. I let's see, when I was in elementary school, I would go to work with my mom. As my mom walked next door to our house, literally, they built our house, behind the nursing home, the nursing home was our family on nursing home. And so when school was out, I go over there sometimes, but we were there every day, literally just about every day, except for weekends, and then sometimes on weekends at the nursing home. So anytime I could not go to the nursing home, I would go to work with my dad. My dad was the director of a, let's see, I think it was a day program. I think that's what they called it, it was the 70 day program for youth who had some kind of criminal background, they might have gotten in trouble be in it. And it may have been related to drugs as well. But it was a drug treatment program. But they also may have had some other offenses, right. And so I would go to work with him. And witnessing his work with those. They were all teenagers, they seem much older to me because I was in elementary school, but witnessing his work with them, made me want to become a psychologist. But I didn't have the language to know that that's what I wanted to be I didn't know it was a what's called a psychologist at that point. And because of that experience, and there's so much that goes into that, and if you want to hear it, I'll tell you later, but because of that experience, I watched my dad work with them, I watched them, and the way they communicate with each other and how my dad and other people who worked in the center facilitated that communication. And so even communication that would seem negative, or hostile, or whatever you call it, that wasn't good for an elementary school person. Then I also noticed that they were just very honest with each other. And they will walk away from those interactions, more connected with each other, not angry, not upset, not hostile, they were just more connected in. And I said, I want to do that when I grow up, I want to work with people to help them have those kinds of honest relationships where you can communicate freely, and not run away when there's some kind of difficult interaction. And so that's why I wanted to become a psychologist. Still didn't have the language for it at that point. And then I have to say that in my life, I the church was always such a part of life, just going to different things. But the church was more like a community center to me. And that our church was a Community Church that helped so many. They build apartments for low income housing, they had a credit union, there were all kinds of things that that church did, and I just noticed those things growing up and I thought this is really cool. This is what the church is supposed to be to help people. And for me I just had a good experience growing up learning all those Bible stories that some kids didn't care about, but I love them. And I really wanted to be like Solomon wise like Solomon and I was I still remember learning about the story of Solomon and the two women who were fighting over a baby and Solomon said Okay, cut the baby in half and I was like, Oh my gosh, you know, kids do this you know the suspense and then of course he did not the woman whose baby it was said no, don't do it. And the other woman say yeah, cut it in half. And Selma said, Okay, now I know whose baby it is. And I thought, oh, man, I want to be like that when I grew up. I just want it to be wise. What Kendra Holt-Moore 14:27 follow up question. Have you ever had to threaten to cut in half? Vikki Gaskin-Butler 14:32 No, I have not thank goodness. Thank goodness. And just for the record, I would not use that tactic. Find another way to figure it out. Zack Jackson 14:47 That's kind of go in the nuclear option right away. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 14:54 But I was just impressed with that. So I thought okay, I want to be wise and those like those critical things just stuck with me throughout my life in training, and then fast forward all the way to becoming a psychologist. And I was in practice for about four, three, actually three years out of graduate school. And I was in this church and working with a group of women. And we had this group we all wanted to meet, we were all the same age, it was really funny. We were literally the same age, we were all like 30 to 32. And dealing with life and having children and all that stuff, and, and we had this group get together, and I ended up becoming the leader of the group, and bringing together resources that we would study together and all that stuff. And I've ended up being like the pastor of the group. And from that experience, that's when I decided to accept my call to ministry because I thought, okay, it's not going to be me just donating, quote, unquote, my idea was to donate my services to the church as a psychologist, but I also realized I could do the other stuff, too. And so I accepted my call, went to seminary, and then seminary, I learned that I was a psychologist. Can I say that because my friends are terrible. They're really terrible. If they're listening, y'all should know y'all are terrible, because I really terrible, they're my friends. But I had this aha moment in one of my classes as we were getting near the end of the process in seminary and getting closer to graduation. And I said, Oh, my God, I'm a psychologist. I'm a psychologist. And they were like, Yeah, we know, we've been getting free therapy this whole three years. But what I mean was, I, I've always known that I could do all the local church stuff, because I learned it growing up, it was a part of my life. And in my daily life, especially from, I don't know, almost birth, but a part of my life. So I knew I could do local church, I could run a church, I could do all those things. I could do parish ministry. But in seminary, what I learned is, I really I just would say the world is my pulpit. Because I, I look at the intersection of psychology and theology for me, and it helps me to really relate better to everyone, anyone and everyone I encounter. Even the people that might be difficult. And I mean, I was challenged in so many ways like the I think it was the Timothy McVeigh. All remember Timothy McVeigh that Oklahoma City. Okay, so I was in a class and we were talking about Timothy McVeigh and and we were wrestling with how does God feel about Timothy McVeigh? And he came away with it, like, Oh, God probably loves Timothy McVeigh. Even though he may seem unlovable to all of us, he did something very awful, awful, write something that was so harmful and caused so much pain. And we were like, okay, so if God loves Timothy McVeigh, God loves everyone. And then we went to lots of other historical figures that were pretty awful, and awful in my mind. But those are the kinds of challenging discussions we had in seminary, and those are the kinds of things that helped me to become a better psychologist and being non judgmental and more understanding, and more loving and more kind, kinder, just to help me figure out okay, often when people come in my office, they're in a difficult spot and they've had some really difficult experiences, and it's my job to help them to see themselves even though I don't necessarily say it this way, but to help them see themselves as God sees them, in my estimation. And so that's the work I do, I really try to help people see themselves for who they really are not by all the labels that are placed on them. So anyway, that was a really long answer. Kendra Holt-Moore 20:25 Great answer. And I guess a follow up question that I have, immediately, you know, when, when you identify yourself as a woman, a psychologist of religion, like you've talked about the pieces of like, where the psychology comes in where the religion comes in for you. But can you talk a little bit about what it means to do that from a womanist? Angle? And just, you know, considering that there's probably many people who will hear that and not necessarily know what that means? Like, what is it to be womanist versus feminist? And how, like, how has your journey with that identity kind of unfolded? Vikki Gaskin-Butler 21:04 Okay, so, also in seminary, I realized I was a womanist. And it was basically because of how I was reared by my mother, other aunts, uncles, you know, extended family, grandparents, all of that. And so, Alice Walker coined the phrase womanist is to feminist as purple is to lavender. And so, I was taught by a lot of womanist scholars, and, and I can't say a lot of them, I read a lot of their work, but I was taught by a couple of them. And so theologians, African American women theologians, took on the label of womanism, or womanist, because they read the stuff which is interested in the stuff my dad read, and seminary was Black Theology, by James Cohn and others, he kind of was the founder of Black Theology. And so those women were Reading it. And they were saying, well, we don't see ourselves in this literature. And so they started to read and write and interpret scriptures, and life experiences from their own perspective and not trying to read themselves into what was being written in Black Theology and, and feminist theology. And so, I say, for me, I live in the intersection every day of race, class, and gender, which is what woman is do. And so for me, and woman, as we say, those three things help us race, class and gender help us to relate to many different people, who have many different experiences and our role, our job, if you will, is to use those experiences to help others. So living in let's see, living with both privilege and oppression, at the same time, puts me in a different space than some other people who don't necessarily have both privilege and oppression, they're really living with oppression. And so, as a womanist, my goal, my role is to help elevate others, whomever they are not excluding anyone. And so, how I do that, or how I've done that is, in psychology, one of the two of the ways in particular, because of the things I like to do on learn about, I was able to pull psychology of religion into my work with others, and multicultural psychology into my work with others. And a special piece of multicultural psychology actually, is religion and spirituality. And not I shouldn't say not too many, but some psychologists aren't that comfortable dealing with those two topics. So I really helped my students explore those things and are, you know, allow and in a enable my clients or patients to do the same. So Oh, no, Kendra Holt-Moore 24:55 did I answer Yeah, no, I know. And I think it's, it's just helpful for people to hear because like the My first encounter with, like womanist scholarship was in grad school, and it's not, you know, I think that that's something for, for the person who's kind of on the outside of grad school in general, or, you know, just Reading, like totally different genres of stuff it, it just is, there's not a context, often I think, for people to know what that means, I think it's helpful. The way you frame that as being, you know, about, like, caring for people at the intersection of race and gender in particular, and classes you added. And, and I think that that's, that's interesting, too, like the, the intersection of identity as like a woman, a psychologist of religion, I want to ask you just about that a little bit more. Because a lot of my a lot of my own research is in psychology of religion. And so there's, there's a pattern in Psych of religion, just to kind of share for people on the outside. And I think we may have like, brought this up a couple times before, but a lot of the demographics of people who are studied in psychology research, I think, in general, but it also extends to like religion is it's the weird problem. It's that all a lot of the people the pattern is for them to be Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic. And so I'm, I'm wondering, like you, Vicki, are sort of situated in a way where, like, the stuff that you do, and I also, I tried to do a little bit of stalking of you on the internet and found your CV and, you know, the work that you do, and is really like resisting that pattern of weirdness the acronym of the weird in psychology research. And I just, it's really, it's really cool to see that it's like filling a gap in a lot of the pattern of like, who gets studied and who gets brought into work and research on psychology. And so I'm just wondering, like, can you speak to that a little bit? Like, how does that? What are the kinds of things that you notice in your own work that seems to like resist, maybe, like, wider patterns that you see in publications in psychology on, you know, on stuff that you do? Or like, you know, how is that how does that feel different? I guess. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 27:44 So. Excuse me, one thing I wanted to say, I just thought of it. So I'm going to answer your question. But yeah. It just occurred to me again, that when I told you, I did that group with the women in the church, and that led to my call. The funny thing was, the first book we use was written by a womanist. theologian, in which she translated the she's an Old Testament, or Hebrew Bible scholar. And so she translated these different passages in the Hebrew Bible, interpreted them and then wrote a book to get other people to think about that. And so they're that womanism, and Kendra Holt-Moore 28:28 I'm more shadowing you becoming a woman. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 28:35 But anyway, so. So let me talk a little bit about training, because I spent many years doing training of students. And so where I find this intersectionality is when we look at who becomes psychologist, right. So now worked in a training program in clinical psychology. Most recently, I worked in a training program for mental health counselors, school counselors, a mental health and school counselors. And then, prior to that, have worked with students who were in clinical programs as well, or pursuing a social work degree or counseling psychology degree. So those are the so this is the frame of reference I'm thinking about. And what I found is for me as a womanist. It's It's my calling, if you will, to make sure that students are learning about how to work with all people. Not that we'll be experts at working with all people, but we do really need to pay it tension to the people who come into our offices, whether it's a zoom office, or whether it's in reality, you know, face to face, we need to be able to look at all of the cultural issues that surface, right. And what I know from my own training is I didn't learn that I taught it to myself, honestly. And that's how I became this person who does multicultural work, I taught it to myself, in graduate school, and as a result of that, then I did the work while I was in graduate school, I was hired to do that work, working with multicultural populations in graduate school, and then it just kind of follow me until today. And so I was engaged in the work before I knew it was called womanist work. And so that's a key thing for me in training that I really work hard at helping students understand as much as they can about the different factors that affect people that aren't necessarily taught in the textbooks, the the traditional psychology textbooks, and I'll say traditional, because in traditional texts, there's not a lot of cultural diversity that's discussed in the traditional texts. But then there's always the separate multicultural, Kendra Holt-Moore 31:29 aka, white. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 31:34 Boy, and so many college students or, you know, middle class, you know, you just say that we're, and so. So that's one of the things I've done, and I, in terms of my teaching, that's one of the things I've enjoyed the most and also has been the most difficult at the same time. Because it's challenging when I'm the first person to bring all these things up, and somebody goes what, you me race does have an impact on health. Yeah, does a class has an impact on health? Yeah, it does. Physical health, yes, you know, those kinds of things. And so covering those kinds of things in my courses, that's been really fun for me, I'm really difficult, but I wouldn't have it any other way. And then the other side in terms of research, if you looked at one of the last things I did, before leaving USF St. Petersburg was working with a group, well, one of my colleagues, Jamie McHale, who is a zero to three experts, zero to three age expert, developmental clinical psychologist, but early childhood development, and do yoga, Bella, say he roped me into doing that work with because I was reluctant. I was like, I'm not an expert in zero to three. I'm not an expert, a zero to three. And he said, but you're the person I need to do this work because he was trying to develop co parenting intervention for first time parents of African American children. And first time parents together. And so again, that's woman his work, because most of the people involved in the study were low income, African American parents, and we work together to develop a curriculum and an intervention program to help them learn how to better co parent, their children. And I say children because often, they might have been having their first child together, but they had other children. And so one of the byproducts of the research was that not only did they do better with co parenting the first child together, but it also helped them with co parenting issues with other parents, you know, that they have been connected with previously. So it just pops up all the time. I don't really think about it. I just, I just live it. Kendra Holt-Moore 34:18 Yeah. Yeah. No, that that makes sense. And it's, it makes a lot of sense to to hear you talk about how a lot of the methods that you, you know, draw on to do the work that you do. It ends up being self taught for a lot of people. And that's, that's interesting, and like, of course challenging because it's like, you have to kind of be the one to pave the way for that to be more of the standard. I'm curious about how, you know, I I noticed that it looked like this might have been I can't remember when this was but you you've done some, like research and presentation on like religious coping, is that right? And so it, you know, it doesn't have to be like, religious coping specifically, but like, what is your experience of religious identity with things like race and gender? And how to how do those things come together in your work, especially since you have this interesting background where you did do an MDiv. And that's, you know, that gives you a lot of valuable experience and exposure to literature and care for people. But you know, it's like a different way of applying that kind of training in in research. So just yeah, what could you tell us about that? Vikki Gaskin-Butler 35:52 So, my work with religious coping, that was a long time ago. But I did teach psychology of religion for many years. And I have to say, my students want to ask, one student in particular asked me, How did I teach the course because I was a person of faith, and she knew it. Everybody knew it. But I taught it in a way that it taught it as a psychologist, really, I wanted people to understand that there are many different ways of looking at religion and spirituality. And it's not all helpful in terms of how it's applied, how religion and how spiritual things are applied, and people's lives. And so as psychologists, our job is really to help people utilize religion and spirituality in a way that's healthy for them. That's, that's our job. Our job is not to change people's religious beliefs, or any of that, to get them to believe or not believe any of that. It's really to help them understand the role of religion in their lives and figure out how it can be used to help them. And so. So my dissertation, oh, my gosh, I just laugh every time I think about what were my findings. So, in this when I was doing the research, I was in the space of oh my gosh, it's got to be this internal experience of the Divine that makes people you know, better people or makes them cope with life's difficulties. And then I laugh because what I found is what psychologists already knew, is that is not that not really bad internal thing. For the group that I study. It's not really that internal relationship with the divinity or with God, that matters most. It's really, these, it was called extrinsic social, religious coping. And what that means is, people go to mosques, people go to temples, people go to religious services of different kinds, or participate in religious bodies, not because of that, divinity. internal to the, you know, up, up relationship, it's the gathering around, it's the connection with other people that matters most. And with psychology, we call that social support. And that's one thing we know that work, social support helps people. So I did a dissertation to help us find out what Zack Jackson 39:02 is there anything special then about, like, people who reach out to their religious organizations for that sort of support? Or do you see the same kind of coping being from book clubs and Zumba and CrossFit or whatever people are into? Vikki Gaskin-Butler 39:20 Honestly, with the dissertation? Yeah, it's, it's the same. It's just that there when people are gathered around something, whatever that something is, so it could be the religious thing. It could be zoom, but it could be the book club. What matters is the connection with the other people. That's the that's, that's the biggest thing. And now for because okay, how do I say this delicately, because sometimes when people gather with religious groups or people, the last thing they talk about Religion, sometimes they do, you know, if it's if it's a Bible study, or you know, a religious themed gathering, but what we found is these, these people will connect with each other beyond that, and the religion, religion was the thing that brought them together to connect. But it's not necessarily the thing that keeps them connected. It can be those other things like the same people might be in book clubs and other things like that, too. But social support really matters. Now, I'm not saying that religion doesn't matter, because that's the thing that brought them together in the first place. Kendra Holt-Moore 40:45 We're all watching the clergy person's facial expressions right now, like Zach. Ian Binns 40:51 I just religion still matters by wish Zack Jackson 40:54 that that wasn't. I wish that wasn't borne out in my experience so keenly, and the sort of thing that all US clergy people talk about all the time, where they're like, why are they even coming? When they don't care about this? They're here for the cookies. I'm like, Alright, so nobody comes to the Bible study. But 100 People come to the chicken barbecue. All right, then. Okay, this is we should just open a chicken shop. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 41:26 So you do like some organizations you have the chicken barbecue and Bible study together? Oh, there Zack Jackson 41:33 you go. In the door, you have to quote a Bible verse in order to get your chicken that's that's how we do it. It's got to be Jesus. Oh, what is it Ecclesiastes 1019. Is that what it is? The food was made for laughter and whining gladdens the heart and money answers everything. My life first Vikki Gaskin-Butler 42:07 answer your question Kim Jong Kendra Holt-Moore 42:09 Yeah, no, I just Yeah, I and my question might have also been a little bit rambley. Because there's just so like, I love listening to people talk about like psych of religion stuff. And, and so yeah, like, just like anything that you want to share. I am curious about the class that you taught, or that you you taught or you do teach this still sometimes Vikki Gaskin-Butler 42:32 I haven't taught it. I haven't taught it in five years now. I think Oh, yeah. How many years I'm trying to remember how many years it's been since I left, USA, three years, three years, Zack Jackson 42:43 it's been at least five years, the past year. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 42:50 So psychology of religion, I approached it as. So we, we did a couple things. I'll use two different textbooks. One was on psychology and religion. And I can't remember the name of it. And I'm looking over here and I forget that's not my bookshelf and my other. But it's a very interesting empirical study of psychology and religion, right? You know, the empirical study. So I use that text. And I also used another text that was a psychology of religion and spirituality that, no, it wasn't empirical. It was really talking about a lot of Eastern religions, and how helping students understand the meanings of those religions, symbols and those religions, that kind of thing and how people utilize those religions in their day to day lives, right. But I also did something interesting where I threw in William James psychologist who wrote the varieties of religious experience and that the students, what is this rambling on and on and on? What is he doing? I used it because I wanted them first to see a psychologist who emphasize religion in a way that they perhaps weren't used to. And so and he had just had a lot of interesting life experiences moving all over the place moving back and forth from Europe to the United States and doing all this stuff. And then he was of course prolific in terms of writing and research and all that stuff. So anyway, I use that and I threw and stuff like that. Have you seen the video religious realist by Bill Maher? Yeah, I've Kendra Holt-Moore 44:55 heard of it, but I haven't seen it. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 44:57 Okay, so I threw that a long time. I go, Yeah, it's old. But very good. I threw that in, I threw on stuff like What the Bleep doing? No, I threw in. See you. And if I was teaching it now I'd have them listen to your podcast too. But I put in a lot of different things to give them lots of different perspectives about religion, to help them understand that, whatever their way, is, is not the only way. Because inevitably, I'd have two camps in my class, every single class, the division, the people who are psychology, is it? What is this, the religion is the opiate of the people like this is ridiculous. And then I had the very religious students. And so I would try to get them to come toward center a little bit, just to move a little bit to understand the other side, I would, we would do debates on specific topics. And I would talk to them about the idea that what we're doing in this class is not to get you to change anybody else's mind. It's just to understand, try to understand others perspectives. And inevitably, they would do that many of them not all of them, because some of them would dig their heels in and say, You know what, that can damage your Gascon bowler, this religious stuff is just gone too far. I cannot, you know, this is awful. And I should also want call Jesus Camp heavy. Kendra Holt-Moore 46:38 But I'm gonna have to write down all these things. You're saying? I'm teaching this class in the spring? Zack Jackson 46:43 Yeah, I live that. Jesus Camp both in in the documentary and also living through stuff like that. Yes. Kendra Holt-Moore 46:52 Yeah, it might hit too close to home for me to watch that. Yeah. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 46:57 So I will show all of those things. And we will have really rich discussions and relate it to the material we were covering in psychology of religion, especially on the empirical stuff, and then just looking at so what is it that? What is it about all of these things that helpful to the people involved? What's harmful? If you see it that way? Do they see it as harmful? Psychologically speaking, are they okay? I mean, and so we had lots of rich discussions about that. That was my absolute favorite class to teach. Kendra Holt-Moore 47:35 Yeah, that's so fun. What did you what what? What was the topic that people that? What was the topic that students got most worked up about? Or what was like, the favorite topic of the class? Vikki Gaskin-Butler 47:50 It wasn't a topic, but it was. It was the whole course. And I'll say it this way. Students were really upset with me that I could not say, the research definitively says this, oh, about anything, anything. Because I said, this is what we have, because psychology of religion is, it's still growing, right? But we don't have millions and millions of people studying this, right. But what we can say is, this is what we know, based on this research, and we went, I mean, we covered so many different topics, from clergy health, to religious attributions, and social psychology and all these different things. And, and they were just frustrated, because I wasn't giving them definitive answers. I said, this is the research we have. And you have to look at this research, and then look at the people you're with whom you're going to work, and figure out whether this research bears out or not. And it might not. And if it doesn't, at least you have a foundation to use to approach the people. And so that was the biggest issue. And on both sides, because students who were really religious, it didn't matter what their religious background was, because I had some diversity there. They really wanted me to just come down and say religion is great, it helps everyone and you know, because I'm a believer and this you know, particular faith tradition. And then the other who wanted me to just say, religion is awful, and doesn't help anybody else. Like Yeah, can't do that. So that was a big deal in Dallas. They were frustrated Oh, Zack Jackson 49:51 we can approach our our like our theology or religion with that kind of mindset where you're like, here's what the here's what are this? Here's what scripture suggests, and here's how it bears out. And does that work in this context or not? And if not, like, what, where can we? How can we adapt? What can we do? Like, wow, what if that just that worldview that you just put forward, like apply that to our Faith Journeys? And I feel like we would all be so much more mature, Kendra Holt-Moore 50:18 knows that we need absolutely 50:22 no ambiguity, no room for a gray. ambiguity is hard to preach? I'll tell you. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 50:30 Yes, it is. Yes, it is. Kendra Holt-Moore 50:34 I think that's really I imagine that there were days that that felt especially challenging to you, as the faculty member, like teaching that class, but there's something so satisfying about those moments in class to where students, they know, they're not going to get a clear cut answer from you. And they're forced to sit in the ambiguity, and you can just see the frustration. But it's like a constructive kind of frustration of like, you get the point. If you can see why this is complicated. And that is like a job well done, I think to like, have a roomful of students frustrated. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 51:15 The one of the last time that I taught of course, then students would leave class and follow each other down the hall and then go find a place to sit and talk and talk about what we talked about in class and then come back the next week and say, you know, we talked about this and 51:34 I love that that's awesome. Ian Binns 51:42 Yeah, I don't know how many professors could actually claim that right that they would see their students especially in that type of class walking now and then continuing the conversation. That's, that's really cool. So Vikki Gaskin-Butler 51:55 that was always they didn't know it. They didn't know that was my goal. Ian Binns 52:03 No, I have to be honest, and you can delete this. It is fun for me to sit here and watch you. Kendra asked these questions, especially as a So Vicki, I don't know if you picked up on this. This is Kendra's first post as an assistant professor, as faculty. This semester, yeah. This semester, this is her very first semester as faculty, so Zack Jackson 52:26 she's planning your syllabi right now. Talking to you. Yeah. Yeah, Ian Binns 52:30 it's really fun to watch her do this. Kendra Holt-Moore 52:32 Yeah, like maybe I should email Vicki later, get some more tips. Ian Binns 52:38 I will make sure you have her email. So Kendra Holt-Moore 52:41 yeah. Um, yeah, no, I'm sorry, Carrie. I'm really excited though. Like I, I'm teaching psychology of religion in in the spring at, you know, 830 in the morning, so everyone who's registered for that class, like, wants to be there, I think because it's at 830 in the morning, and, and so I'm really excited, I think it'll be really fun. And it's fun to hear someone else who's taught this class, you know, reflect on that experience. Um, I, I'm wondering to just, you know, like, in talking about religion, and again, just considering like your, your roles and your experience in on the more like, spiritual, you know, MDiv side of that versus your experience with religion. As a psychologist. What do you notice, when, when, when people read, research or conduct research about religion, religion becomes a variable in a way that sometimes like you have to kind of, you know, we as researchers, we make decisions about how to simplify religion to fit as a variable that you can like, create, you know, find correlations with it with various other, you know, demographic factors or whatever. What are some of the challenges that you've noticed in, like simplifying religion in that way? And what what's something that you wish people knew about studying religion as a research variable, if that makes sense? Vikki Gaskin-Butler 54:20 So what I noticed in especially in teaching psychology and religion is looking at the, the way religion was operationalize as you said, it's, it's, it's very difficult to operationalize that was actually one of the exercises we did in class. We looked at words like faith, what does that mean belief? What does that mean and those kinds of things. And what I would say is psychologists of religion should be clear about what it is they want to No. And so, if I want to know how religion affects no cardiac health, then that's too big. All right? What aspect of religion? Are you concerned about? Is it something's simple, like church attendance? Is it something like, I walk in a group with people from my church? We have a walking group or you know, that kind of thing? Kendra Holt-Moore 55:36 I think it is a God. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 55:39 Yes. Right. Believing us What? What does it mean? And I think, and I also think that's just so hard to do, right? Because we're narrowing down something that's so big. But if you really want to answer some questions, I think it is important to operationalize, get it down to the, the more, the most specific thing you can think of that you really want to know about. Because that's what I noticed, makes the that's part of what leads to frustration with ambiguity. Because we could have 10 studies on how religion affects cardiac health, and they all operationalize religion differently. And so what do we really know, when we're looking at these 10 Different studies? Well, we know it, it's for the walking group, people, they walk with their, you know, friends from the synagogue, and they're good, right there, their health is really great. But then we also know, they probably eat more fruits and vegetables, like, external variables. Something else is going on there, too. So, um, so anyway, I think that's, that's one of the bigger things, and I that's a conversation that will I mean, in terms of research that's gonna go on forever and ever, I think, because we really have to, to keep working at it. And, yeah, just trying to understand what we really want to know. And that that's difficult, but I think it's, it does help in the study of religion when we get to those specific things. So does that answer your Kendra Holt-Moore 57:28 question? Yeah. No, that's, that's a great answer. And I think, you know, like, what you're suggesting, too, about being very specific and narrow? I think part of that is also it's like the responsibility of researchers, I think, to to be transparent about that in their publications about like, what are we actually talking about? Because then, you know, we end up like, generalizing about religion, based on this, like, very specific oper operationalization of it. And so yeah, like, what you're saying it at all, that all makes perfect sense. Oh, God, Vikki Gaskin-Butler 58:06 I just thought of, um, one of the things that I'm interested in and just read some about not a whole whole lot is just anecdotally, prayer can be a helpful thing, right? It can be. And so one of my colleagues said, he just looked at me with a frown. He was like, have you read this stuff? For it doesn't work. So I added that to the course. There was another study where prayer wasn't helpful. So anyway, but there, there's lots of books about how prayer is helpful. But it helps to define what's happening with prayer. Because sometimes people are praying in a way that increases their anxiety, and then it's not helpful. And then there are other times where they're praying in a way that makes them calmer and makes them less depressed, and you know, that kind of thing. And so, that I think, illustrates what I'm talking about, if we're gonna say we want to understand prayer, and its impact on people, what kind of prayer, you know, really be specific about that and, and try to understand how it can be helpful to to folks, Kendra Holt-Moore 59:27 yeah, I think that's a great example. The, the research on prayer like that, that really does, like hit on that point. Well, I have a question that I think could be a good final question. And unless Zach wants to add something else, but I was gonna say, Vicki, as we wrap up, like what do you want to share? Or maybe like, or maybe we kind of did this in the beginning, so I don't know if this is gonna work. But Vicki, what is it that you want to share with us as wrapped up about, like, work that you're doing right now, anything that, you know, you're excited about that you want people to know about. Let this be a shameless moment of self promotion of what you do. Ian Binns 1:00:14 Can I can I actually, maybe make that question a little more specific? So, you know, as I said at the beginning, you and Malcolm will be coming to Charlotte. So what is it? Building on Kendra's question? What do you hope to do? Once you move? What are your goals when you come to Charlotte? Yeah, that's a good one and start a new. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 1:00:43 So excuse me. I actually started working in private practice here, virtual private practice here in Florida, just a couple months ago. And so I plan to get licensed in North Carolina, and started private practice there. But the funny thing is, I only want private practice to be a part of what I do, I don't want that to be my daily, like everyday, all day, kind of work. I really like working with groups of people. So here, you will see how that pastoral kind of influence comes out of me. Because I like working, and doing things like workshops and retreats that focus on spiritual, psychological and physical well being. And so those are some of the things that I want to do. And it'll be under the guise of my private practice. I also have this other project that I'm working on, I won't give you the name of it yet. But it's, it's a news network, I want to develop an online news network. And the site itself has already been developed, we're just needing to populate it with stories and stuff like that. So I had to put it on the back burner for a little bit while I got my private practice stuff up and running. But I want to do that as well. Because I just, I think that there are many ways to reach people. And I want to try to reach as many people as I can, in positive ways. And so my, my new site will do that, as well as my website. So, um, one more thing, I'm also working, I won't start start start, I've actually started writing, but I'm gonna work on my first book, started working with the editor in January. Because we're doing something small, like moving right. Zack Jackson 1:03:00 Here at some point, you're asleep, right? Vikki Gaskin-Butler 1:03:03 Yes, exactly. So I have a lot of things going on. But this is the thing I always said, I am a person that I chose to become a psychologist because I get bored easily. So I need to be doing different things. Have my hands in different parts, I guess. And so my career I've done a lot of different things. But I feel like now, this is my time where I'm going to do all of the things that I believe I'm called to do at this point in my life, which is writing and doing retreats and workshops and consulting and that network thing on either side. Zack Jackson 1:03:55 podcast 1:03:56 that's pretty Yeah, Ian Binns 1:03:57 yeah. And podcasts. Don't forget your podcast. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 1:03:59 Yes. And the podcast. The blog and the podcast are on my on my it's got to be Dr. Vicki website is almost done. I just have to add a couple podcast episodes and then we'll make it live. Zack Jackson 1:04:14 But in the meantime, it cool when people are done listening to this episode, they should search in their preferred podcast provider for the healing the human spirit podcast with and they should definitely subscribe to that and listen to the one episode that's up so far. Yeah. Exciting. Or maybe multiple guests. Ian Binns 1:04:37 What would you say? Yeah, I said, I hear I hear he's a good guest. Your first guest he's alright now you said decent the first time. I did say decent, right? Zack Jackson 1:04:46 This is your future boss here. Ian Binns 1:04:48 You can keep that in because Malcolm will hear him like get that. Laugh he'll just laugh. I expect nothing less. Kendra Holt-Moore 1:04:58 Well, it's exciting to hear everything You're doing Vicki. And we're really happy that you decided to talk to us today. So thank you for being with us. Zack Jackson 1:05:08 Thanks so much. Yeah. Thank you. Vikki Gaskin-Butler 1:05:12 Thank you. I'm so excited. I was really looking forward to this. And I have to say I was a little nervous. Oh God, what are they going to ask me? Will I be ready? Will I be ready? And what Ian, what did Malcolm my husband say to me, right before this, he says, Go have fun. And Kendra Holt-Moore 1:05:36 absolutely, yeah, well, thank you. Thank you.
Episode 96 We are beyond thrilled to welcome Dr Jennifer Wiseman to the podcast today. We talk about her faith journey as well as her work in astronomy as she helps us to understand why the James Webb Space Telescope (launching this week), is going to take the Hubble to the next level. Her enthusiasm and wonder is contagious, so I hope you're ready to be inspired! Dr Jennifer Wiseman is the Director of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) program of Dialogue on Science, Ethics, and Religion (DoSER). She is also an astrophysicist, studying the formation of stars and planetary systems using radio, optical, and infrared telescopes. She studied physics for her bachelor's degree at MIT, discovering comet Wiseman-Skiff in 1987. After earning her Ph.D. in astronomy from Harvard University in 1995, she continued her research as a Jansky Fellow at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory and as a Hubble Fellow at the Johns Hopkins University. She also has an interest in national science policy and has served as an American Physical Society Congressional Science Fellow. She has worked with several major observatories and is currently a senior astrophysicist at the Goddard Space Flight Center. She is also a public speaker and author, and enjoys giving talks on the inspiration of astronomy and scientific discovery to schools, youth and church groups, and civic organizations. She is a Fellow of the American Scientific Affiliation and a former Councilor of the American Astronomical Society. https://sciencereligiondialogue.org/ https://hubblesite.org/ https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/ https://roman.gsfc.nasa.gov/ Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. Ian Binns 00:13 Our guest today is the director of the American Association for the Advancement of Science program of dialogue on science, ethics and religion, also known as dozer. She is also an astrophysicist studying the formation of stars and planetary systems using radio, optical and infrared telescopes. She studied physics for her bachelor's degree at MIT discovering comet Wiseman Skiff in 1987. After earning her PhD in astronomy from Harvard University in 1995, she continued her research as the Jansky fellow at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory, and as a Hubble Fellow at the Johns Hopkins University. She also has an interest in national science policy and has served as an American Physical Society congressional science fellow. She has worked with several major observatories, and is currently a senior astrophysicist at the Goddard Space Flight Center. She's also a public speaker and author and enjoys giving talks and inspiration of astronomy and scientific discovery to schools, youth and church groups, and civic organizations. She's a fellow of the American scientific affiliation, and a former Counselor of the American Astronomical Society. We're very excited to welcome Dr. Jennifer Wiseman to the show today. Jennifer Wiseman 01:22 Thank you, it's my pleasure to join you. Ian Binns 01:25 So, um, Jennifer, again, thank you for agreeing to come and talk, we just, you know, we've met you and I met several years ago, I know that you and Zach know each other as well. And so we kind of wanted to start off with what got you into astronomy. And then how did that grow to include your science and religion work as well, Jennifer Wiseman 01:47 I grew up out in a rural area in Arkansas, on a family farm. And so I was just surrounded by nature growing up, we lived in a pretty area that had nearby lakes and rivers. So I enjoyed everything about the natural world, I thought we had animals of our own livestock and pets, but also lots of wildlife that I enjoyed seeing. And then I also enjoy just wandering around meadows and the streams and, you know, swimming, and kayaking, and all those kinds of things. And that made me appreciate the natural world, we also had dark night skies when I was growing up. So we could go out at night and see stars from horizon to horizon. And that is such a rare treat these days, most people live in cities or suburbs and have stray light from parking lots and stores and streets that create a glow in the sky and really drown out a lot of the beauty of seeing stars, unfortunately. But I was able to see the night sky, we would go on evening walks my parents and dogs and and I would enjoy these these regular walks. And I would imagine what it was like to, to go up where the stars are. And I would I was curious. So I think that started me out just being naturally curious about nature. And then science was a kind of a natural affinity then because science is basically the formal study of how nature works. And I had good teachers in my public schools who encouraged me in all kinds of subjects, science, mathematics, but also humanities and music. But all of that together, I think was the foundation and then Pair that with as I was growing up, there was a lot of flurry of interest about space exploration, the Voyager spacecraft, were just sending the first images back to earth, of moons around planets in our solar system, close up views we've never had before. I just thought this was fascinating. And you know, a lot of science fiction like Star Wars movies and things were starting to come out in the late 70s and 80s. And I was caught up in that too. So there was a lot of social interest in space, as well as my own natural affinity for nature. And all of that together, I think set the foundation for my interest in doing something related to the space program, but I didn't have a clue as to how to get involved in it. But thankfully, I had teachers and encouraging family and church that just encouraged me to go on and try anything I wanted. So I went on to study science. Zack Jackson 04:42 That's beautiful. Ian Binns 04:43 Yeah, there's a lot to take away from that. One of the things I love the most is you referred to Star Wars and Star Wars fans. Thank you for that. Zack Jackson 04:53 genre that we've we've spent quite some time on this podcast talking about the value of science fiction and how it implants This sorts of love of cosmos in love of the world into people into children's minds. And so they grow up to great things. Yeah, that's so sorry. Go ahead. Sorry, I'm walking all over you. So I'm, I hear you say that there was a lot of support from family from, from friends and teachers and even church. Did you get any of that? That sort of feeling that science and and God are at odds that so many young Christians did as they're growing up? Did you taste any of that? Or was it all supportive? Jennifer Wiseman 05:36 I never had any sense that there should be some kind of conflict between science and faith. In fact, quite the opposite. I grew up again, in a in a place where nature just surrounded us, it was a rural area where people had farms or they enjoy recreation on the lakes and rivers, and it was pretty and so we just naturally correlated the beauty of the natural world with our faith and our love for God, because we understood that God is the Creator, and God is responsible for the creation and called it good. So I think at a very basic level there, there really wasn't any sense of conflict, quite the opposite that science was the study of God's handiwork. And we should be grateful for that. Now, when it came to the particulars, like how do you interpret the opening verses of the biblical book of Genesis, that seems to stipulate that all of creation came into being in a few literal days and those kinds of things? You know, I think we, we probably took that rather literally in church and so forth. We didn't have any reason not to. But I think I was also given a sense of humility that our pastors and things would would tell us that God doesn't give us all the details in in Scripture that, that He's given us just enough for what we need to know to have a relationship with God, but but he's also given us mines and other tools and giving us more knowledge as time goes on. And so I think, even though I was probably schooled in a more literalistic view of Scripture growing up, I was also given a sense of humility, that there might be more to it than just what is more two more information that that God will give us than just what's written in Scripture. So I think that enabled me as I began to learn more about the scientific picture of the vast size and age of the universe and the development of life, I was able to correlate that with a humble view of scripture that God didn't give us all these details in Scripture, but delights in us using scientific knowledge to learn some of these rich details, and wow, are they Rich, I mean, the universe is not small. It's enormous, beyond our wildest imaginations, both in space and time. And I think that's something that fascinates me the most about astronomy is that it is a time machine, we can use telescopes to see out and that is equivalent to seeing back in time has taken time for the light to get to us from either planets in our solar system, or other stars or distant galaxies. And we can see how the universe has changed over time by looking back in time to distant objects in space. So I think what I did pick up growing up in terms of attention is more of a philosophical tension. I remember watching my favorite program on television, which was the cosmos program, which was a wonderful exploration of the universe. And I really admire Carl Sagan to this day, I'm so grateful for how he opened my eyes to the mysteries of the solar system and the universe beyond and introduced me to these images coming from the Voyager probes of the outer solar system, things like that. But every once in a while he and some other well, spoken scientist would interject some philosophical opinions and things that were kind of denigrating toward religion or religious faith and I picked that up even as a teenager and as a child. I couldn't quite articulate it, but I even then could sense that while I loved the Science, I didn't like some of the content Have dismissive comments I was hearing about religious faith and I, you know, I just kind of put tuck that away, in my mind kind of puzzling. Why does there have to be some kind of, of denigration of faith when you're talking about the majesties of science and, and then, of course, as I became an adult and a scientist, I realized that there is, of course, a strong difference between what the science is telling us about the natural world and how it works. And human philosophical interpretation of which there can be different opinions. And and trying to separate, you know, what is the science telling us from? What are the different human interpretations of what the natural world is telling us about human purpose and meaning, and even our beliefs and God and purpose. And I'm able to do that much better as a as an adult scientist, and to see where that wind falls, then I think a lot of folks in the public may be prepared for when they hear a scientist kind of crossing the line between talking about just the science and expressing personal philosophical views. Zack Jackson 11:12 But I think you do so with the same sort of humility, like it spills over from, from your study of astronomy into your, into your religion and philosophy, that, like you study the stars, and you see the unbelievable fakeness. And you just can't help but let that spill over into everything that well, why would I know everything about philosophy? Why would I know everything about God, that's absurd. I don't even know everything about our solar system. There's like a certain humility, I think that comes from, from when you're really into, into that kind of science that I appreciate, I think, I think astronomy makes me a better Christian, or at least a more of a mystical one. Anyway, Jennifer Wiseman 11:57 I think what astronomy does for me is not you know, sort of prove God or something like that, I think it's very hard to take something from the natural world and use it to prove or disprove something that isn't confined to just the natural, observable world. But what it does do, being a person of faith as I am in enrich that faith, I mean, I believe in God as the Creator and Sustainer of the universe. And when I learn more about what that universe is like, that means that my reverence for God is much deeper. I mean, it's almost scary when you think about the ages of time we're talking about in terms of our own universe, and there may be other universes too, that we don't even know anything about. And yet we read in Scripture, that the same God who's responsible for this 13 point a billion years of the universe, and its content, and its evolution, is also concerned with the lives of us and of the sparrow, you know, of the, of the individual, what we would call insignificant wife in terms of time and space, and yet God chooses to call us significant because of God's own choosing and love. And so it's that kind of, you know, the infinitely large almost, and the infinitely small, almost, that God encompasses that's very hard for me to comprehend. But it does deepen my, my reverent fear and my appreciation for the kind of God that that we read about in Scripture, and that we experience as people of faith. Zack Jackson 13:54 So you are the director of the American, the American Association for the Advancement of Science program of dialogue on science, ethics and religion, which is a huge mouthful. Which is triple A S. dozer, you know, for those who like acronyms, which is an organization that I think every single one of our listeners, like if you if you subscribe to this podcast, and this is an organization that you would be interested in learning more about, but I would wager to guess that a lot of them have never heard of it. Can you tell us a little bit about what you do and what the organization does and what kind of resources are available, how they can connect? Jennifer Wiseman 14:40 Sure. Okay, so so the the world's largest scientific society is the American Association for the Advancement of Science. And that organization does exactly what it sounds like it triple as advances science for the good of people around the world. So AAA is publishes a journal scientific journal called science that many have heard of, or even written scientific articles for. AAA is also advocates the good use of science in society. So, AAA is has public education programs and programs helping legislators to see how science is beneficial to people in all walks of life, triple as sponsors some programs to advocate science for advancing human rights, and to work with different components of society to make sure science is being used to the benefit of all people. One of those programs is this dialogue program called the dialogue on science, ethics and religion, or doser. It's the you can find out about it by the website as.org/doser DDoS, er doser was thought of back in the 1990s, when scientists realized that to really be effective and communicating with people, we needed to understand how important religion and faith is in people's lives. And if we're really going to interface with different communities, especially in the US, we need to recognize that people's faith identity is a very important part of their worldview. Most people identify with a religion or a religious tradition, as an important aspect of their identity, and how they get a lot of their sense of values and worldview, including how they see the world and hear and articulate science and its use in their lives and work in ministries and so forth. So if scientists are not understanding of the importance of religion and faith in the lives of most people, and if they're not able to articulate science in a way that brings people on board and listen to the values of people from faith communities, then scientists are really missing a huge chance of understanding the value of science and how it can be incorporated into the lives of our culture. So the doser program was invented back in the 1990s, to start building those relationships between scientists and religious communities. These are religious communities of all faiths, and scientists of any faith or no faith, but building a dialogue about how science is important in the lives of our people in our culture. Today, the dozer program is very active, we have several projects, one of them, I think you guys are particularly knowledgeable, that is our science for seminaries project, where we work with seminaries from across the country, and even beyond the US that are interested in, in incorporating good science into the training of future pastors and congregational leaders, because science is a part of everyone's life today. So if a church wants to serve the world in the most effective way, they need to know to how to incorporate science into their ministries, if they want to be relevant to our culture, especially for young people, they need to understand the role of science. It's not just the old arguments about science and creation and evolution. A lot of people when they think about science and religion, they immediately wonder if there's some kind of an argument about how old the the world is. And you know, there are still some very interesting questions, of course, about How did life come into being and so forth. But most faith communities now are really much more excited about talking about many other aspects of science as well like space exploration. Could there be life beyond Earth or, or more practical things? How do we incorporate good science into ministries to the poor or helping people around the world have better food better, cleaner water? How do we get the best science incorporated into the best health care practices? I mean, this is of course come to the forefront during this pandemic with COVID-19 and trying to understand the science of vaccinations and the social reality of distributing vaccine and getting people to understand and trust the science enough to become protected as best we can against the terrible disease. So all these aspects Our I think invigorating a dialogue between faith communities and scientists in our dozer program really seeks to bring scientists and faith communities into better relationship and contact. And of course, these are overlapping communities. I mean, a lot of scientists themselves are people of faith from various faith traditions. But even scientists who are not or not, for the most part, are not hostile to faith communities, they just need a better architecture for building dialogue and relationship. In fact, most scientists already of course, are interfacing with people of faith, whether they know it or not the students in their classrooms, people in their lab and so forth. And so we also hold workshops for scientists, at scientific society meetings, and at research universities to help scientists better understand the important role that faith plays in the lives of many, probably most people in the US if you look at the polls, and how to make sure that they are incorporating a respect for that faith component of people's lives when they're talking about science in their classrooms, and, and in their interface with people in their public spheres of influence. Not just to help welcome people into science, but also to help people see how science is relevant to the values they already have. Ian Binns 21:26 So I'm curious if we can shift a little bit a UML mentioned in your bio, that you've did have done some work with Hubble, the Hubble Space Telescope, and you know, we, this is going to be versus being released, hopefully, in the same day that the new The Next Generation Space Telescope, the James Webb Space Telescope will be launched. And so can you talk to us a little bit about your work with the Hubble Space Telescope, and then maybe the distinction between Hubble that a lot of people know about and the new one, the James Webb Space Telescope and what your hopes are for that. Jennifer Wiseman 22:02 I've had the privilege of working with many different types of telescopes throughout my astronomical career. My own research is based on the use of radio telescopes, which are these big dish shaped telescopes. My doctoral research used an array of them out in New Mexico called the Very Large Array or the VLA. In fact, you can drive out there and see the Very Large Array, southwest of Albuquerque. And with these kinds of telescopes, I've been able to study how stars form in interstellar clouds, you can peer in through the dust and see some of these regions where infant stars are forming. I've also used and worked with the Hubble Space Telescope, which is a platform that's now become very famous Hubble is a is a satellite orbiting the Earth. It's not very far above the earth just a little over 300 miles above the surface of the Earth, but it's up there to get it above the clouds. So you can get a much clearer image of objects in deep space, whether you're observing planets or stars or distant galaxies and Hubble has been operating for almost 32 years now, thanks to repeated visits from astronauts that have kept the observatory functioning by replacing cameras from time to time and repairing electronics. So so the the observatories in very good shape. We're recording this discussion right now in mid December looking forward to next week what we're anticipating as it's the launch of another very large space telescope called the James Webb Space Telescope, named after a NASA administrator who was a science supporter back in the Apollo years. This telescope will be every bit as good as Hubble in terms of getting beautiful images of space. But it will also be different from Hubble because it will be very sensitive to infrared wavelengths of light, the Hubble telescope sees visible light like our eyes can see. And even energetic light that's bluer than blue ultraviolet light, which is emitted from energetic processes in galaxies and in regions where stars are forming. Hubble can even see a little bit into the infrared part of the spectrum of light, so that's a little redder than red, which helps us to see somewhat into these interstellar clouds I mentioned where stars are still forming and planets are forming and to see very distant galaxies because as we look out into distance space, light from very distant galaxies has taken millions, sometimes billions of years to come. To us, and as it's traveling through expanding space, that light loses some of its energy, it gets shifted into what we call the reddened part of the spectrum, we get red shifted. Because it's stretched the wavelength of light, we can think of it as being stretched as they pass through expanding space to get to our telescope. And so some of those galaxies even though the light started its trip as blue eight from stars and ends up being infrared light when we receive it here, Hubble can see some of those very distant galaxies, which we're seeing as they were very far back in time when they were just infant galaxies. But some of those galaxies that light is redshift, and even beyond what Hubble can see in this new Webb Space Telescope will see infrared light much farther into the infrared part of the electromagnetic spectrum than Hubble can see. So the Webb telescope will be able to see galaxies even earlier in the history of our universe, when they were just starting to form. And that will complement the kinds of galaxies and the kinds of information that Hubble sees for us. So, you know, we talked about the universe being about 13 point 8 billion years old, which we can glean from various different types of information about the universe. We're now seeing galaxies as they were forming for Well, within that first point, eight of the 13 point 8 billion year history of the universe, we're really seeing the universe at when it was basically in its childhood, and the Webb telescope will show us proto galaxies, the very first generations of stars and gas kind of coalescing as gravity holds it together in the very first few 100,200,000,000 years of the universe after its beginning, so we're excited about that closer to home, the Webb telescope will also see into that deeper into that infrared part of the spectrum that allows us to see deeper into these nurseries of interstellar gas in our own galaxy, where stars are forming and planets are forming and disks around those stars. And to gather the Hubble Telescope, which we anticipate will keep working for quite a few more years, and the Webb telescope will provide complimentary information. For example, when we look at star forming regions, the Hubble Telescope will tell us something about emission in visible light and ultraviolet light. Webb Telescope will give us the infrared part that gives us a lot more information about what those baby stars are like as they form. And even more exciting, we're now we're now discovering that there are planets around other stars we call those exoplanets because they're outside our solar system. We can study something about their atmospheres and in their composition of those atmospheres. Hubble tells us something about the atoms and molecules that emit their light and visible wavelengths and in ultraviolet wavelengths. The Webb telescope gives us information from molecules in these exoplanet atmospheres that emit in infrared wavelengths. So then we can get a whole spectrum of information, we can know whether some of these exoplanets have water vapor, whether they have oxygen, have other kinds of things that we really want to know about exoplanets, and what they're like. So, complimentary science is the name of the game as we look forward to the James Webb Space Telescope, and we think about how it will work in complement to the Hubble Space Telescope in the coming years. Zack Jackson 28:56 I bet you blew my mind in about seven different times in the past couple of years. So I'm not entirely sure where to go with the fact that you can point to telescope towards an exoplanet and look at the way that light passes through the tiny sliver of an atmosphere and be able to then tell what that atmosphere is made out of. That blows my mind. Jennifer Wiseman 29:32 Well, the Hubble Space Telescope was actually the pioneer of this method of studying exoplanets. To study exoplanets, you have to be kind of like a detective because you have to use indirect methods to detect them in the first place, and even to study much about them. I mean, we would all like to simply point a camera at another planet, outside our solar system and take a nice picture But these things are really small. They are tiny objects orbiting bright things we call stars, and they get lost in the glare of the star. So astronomers have to use indirect methods to detect them to detect exoplanets. The first ones were detected not by seeing the planet, but by seeing how the star it was orbiting would wobble in its orbit. And that's because there's a gravitational mutual tug between a planet and its parent star. So even if you can't see the planet, you can see the star wobbling a little bit in its position as the planet orbits around, and they're both actually orbiting what's called the center of mass between the two. So the first exoplanets were detected by noticing stars periodically wobbling in their position, and determining from that what mass of planet, we would need to create that much of a wobble. And then the idea of transiting exoplanets was explored. That is certain planets happened to orbit their parent star in a plane that's along our line of sight as we're looking toward that star. And that means every time the planet passes in front of its parent star, it blocks out a little bit of that star light from our view. So even if we can't see the planet, we can see the starlight dimming just a little bit periodically as the planet orbits in front of it. Those transit observations were used by the Kepler space telescope, to discover hundreds of new exoplanet candidates. In fact, we have 1000s of them of systems simply by looking at the parent star and seeing them dim periodically and then doing follow up observations with other telescopes to really confirm whether or not what's causing that is, is an exoplanet. They have Hubble Telescope has taken this one step farther, which is using transits to, to study the composition of the atmospheres of some of these exoplanets. So when a planet passes in front of its parent star, not only does it block out some of the starlight, but some of the starlight passes through that outer rim of the planet's atmosphere along the outer limb on its way to as it passes through. And that atmosphere, what depending on what's in the planet's atmosphere will absorb some of that light. If there are molecules and atoms in the atmosphere, it will absorb light at very certain colors or frequencies. So a spectroscopy just can take that light and spread it out into its constituent colors, kind of like using a prism. And you can see the very particular color band where light is missing because atoms or molecules in that exoplanet atmosphere have absorbed it. And so we have, we have instruments on the Hubble Space Telescope, that are what we call spectrograph. They don't take the pretty pictures, they simply take the light and spread it out into its constituent frequencies or colors, like a prism and see where there are very particular color bands missing. And that pattern tells us what's been munched out, and that tells us what kinds of atoms or molecules are in the exoplanet atmosphere. So Hubble was the first observatory to be used to determine the composition of an exoplanet atmosphere. And now this has grown into a huge astronomical industry, if you will, of using telescopes, Hubble and other telescopes to do spectroscopic analysis of the atmospheres of exoplanets to learn something about their composition. And here, we're excited about this new webb space telescope that's going to do that as well. But in the far infrared in the sorry, in the mid infrared part of the electromagnetic spectrum, where we can do we can determine even more molecules and kinds of diagnostics that tell us more about what's in these exoplanet atmospheres. We want to know whether planets outside of our solar system are similar or different to planets inside our solar system. And of course, we'd like to know if any of them are habitable for life. We don't yet have the technology sadly to visit planets that are outside our solar system and take samples of their atmospheres or their their dirt if they have dirt or things like that, but we can observe them remotely and so that is what we're trying to perfect are these techniques of taking remote information Like the spectrum of light from an exoplanet atmosphere, and determining from that, what's in that atmosphere. And then from there we can discern whether or not there might be habitability for life. Like we know we need water for life as we know it. So could there be water on one of these exoplanets, or even signs of biological activity, we know that if we looked at Planet Earth from a distance, we would see oxygen in the atmosphere. And that's evidence of, of the work of plant life on our Earth's surface, generating oxygen, this kind of, of process photosynthesis tells us that there's an ongoing biological community, if you will, on planet Earth, otherwise, all the oxygen in the atmosphere would disappear through reactions, but the fact that we have continuing refreshed oxygen tells us that there's biological activity on our planet. If we saw oxygen, as well as other indicators in the atmospheres of other planets, that would be a clue that there might be biological activity there. So we're taking steps the Webb telescope will give us more information than Hubble and then future telescopes beyond Webb will be able to discern whether there are earth like planets with truly Earth light compositions in their atmospheres in in star systems around our galactic neighborhood. So the web is the next step in a whole series of future telescopes that astronomers are planning. Ian Binns 36:39 That's exciting. Yeah. And I, and doing a little bit of research on James Webb and comparing it to the Hubble and and, you know, I've always been a huge fan of the Hubble Space Telescope and you know, have little models of it. Growing up when you know, I'm a huge LEGO fan, when Lego released the new space shuttle model. In the spring, the one that had Hubble with it was really exotic, so I could kind of build the space shuttle and Hubble. And so but doing those comparisons, I then saw just now the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, that's in production, I guess, right? And, Jennifer Wiseman 37:22 yes, so So the Nancy Grace Roman space telescope is named after you guessed it, Nancy Grace Roman, who was just a phenomenal pioneer in the history of NASA's foray into space astronomy, she was the first chief astronomer at NASA headquarters. And back in the 1970s, she was the one who advocated the idea of NASA building a space telescope. Now scientists had been talking about this for even decades about what you could do if you could put a telescope in space, but to actually get it implemented, required someone with a NASA headquarters to champion this idea. And she did, she got it started with a NASA Headquarters back in the 1970s. And that ended up being the Hubble Space Telescope. So she's sometimes referred to as the mother of Hubble. She passed away just recently, but she remained an active interested scientist for all of her life. So this telescope now that's being developed is named in her honor the the Roman space telescope, and it will again complement these other space telescopes, it will complement the Webb Space Telescope, which will launch sooner. And the Hubble Space Telescope, which is already operating, the Roman telescope will be an infrared telescope, you know, like the Webb telescope is, is an infrared Space Telescope. But the difference is that Roman is going to have a much wider field of view, that means it will see a much wider swath of the sky than either Hubble, or the Webb telescope can do. If, if Hubble wants to survey a wide, wider region of the sky, it has to do hundreds of little postage stamp observations and stitch it all together. And we've done that and we've done for example, a Hubble observation of a big part of the disk of the Andromeda Galaxy, which is our nearest big spiral galaxy, and we learned a lot by stitching together little postage stamp observation after observation. This is a project led by Professor Julianne del Canton and her team called the fat program which which is is spelled ph 80. But it's it's Hubble Andromeda Treasury program to look at stars in this nearby galaxy. But it's taken a long time. The Roman telescope can do this wide swath of the sky with just, you know, one exposure because it can see such a wider swath of the sky. And the other thing, the other kind of science that it's really being designed to do is to study the distribution of galaxies. Hubble's really good at looking at an individual galaxy and telling us a lot of information. But if you want to know how hundreds or 1000s of galaxies are distributed around the sky, it takes a long time, my favorite image from Hubble is called the Ultra Deep Field. I don't know if you've seen it. But it was a product of just pointing Hubble in one direction, the sky and collecting faint light over many days. And the product is this collection of little blotches of light that you might think are stars, but each one of them is actually another galaxy like like like or unlike the Milky Way each one that can contain billions of stars. And so if you imagine that extrapolated over the entire sky, you get a sense of how rich our universe is. But as wonderful as that deep field is, and you can see 1000s of galaxies, you can't get a sense of how galaxies are really distributed across wider swaths of the sky because it is a small field of view. The Roman telescope, which should be launched later, this decade, will have a wide field of view that can see how the patterns of galaxies have taken shape. Throughout cosmic history. We know that galaxies are distributed in more of a honeycomb fashion, there are regions where there aren't many galaxies, we call them, voids, voids. And then there are regions where there are kind of quite a few galaxies collected together. We know now that throughout the billions of years of cosmic history, there's been kind of a tug of war between gravity, which is trying to pull things together. And that's creating galaxies and even clusters of galaxies that are held together by their mutual gravitational pool. And something that's pushing things apart, we now know that the universe is not only expanding, but that expansion is getting faster. So something is, is kind of pushing out. And we're calling that dark energy, because we don't really know what it is, it may be some repulsive aspect of gravity. Over time, this tug of war between dark energy pushing things apart, and the matter pulling things together, through what we would call traditional gravitational pull has resulted in the distribution of galaxies that we now have today, we would like to understand that better. And the Roman Space Telescope is going to help us see how galaxies have been distributed across space throughout cosmic time. And then the Webb telescope, and the Hubble telescope can help us hone in on very specific galaxies and small clusters to give us more detail. So again, we use different observatories in complement, because they each have their own kind of unique scientific niche of what they can tell us. And together, we get a much better bigger picture of what's going on in the universe. And we also use telescopes on the ground that are getting more and more sophisticated in what they can do to complement telescopes in space. So all of these facilities work in complement. Ian Binns 43:51 So I'm curious, Jennifer, you know, with Hubble, and you're especially bringing up the Ultra Deep Field. And before that there was so the Hubble Deep Field, and then the hobo Ultra Deep Field, right. And they were both just unbelievable. To look at. I remember when they both came out. And I cannot remember the years, obviously, but I do remember, I think the Hubble are the first one I was able to use and I was a high school science teacher. But it was just unbelievable to look at these things. Will there be with the James Webb Space Telescope? For example? Will we is there will there be an effort to kind of point it in the same direction? You know, the Hubble has been pointing out and look at either the same areas that Hubble's looked at to see what else we could get from that location. And then also to Will there be something kind of like the Hubble Ultra Deep Field with the James Webb, like, is there going to be do you know, or is that just anything is possible? Jennifer Wiseman 44:52 Oh, absolutely. I mean, one of the main drivers for the the James Webb Space Telescope was this desire to look at the Deep feels like Hubble has done. But to be able to see galaxies that are even more distant than what Hubble can pick up the these distant galaxies, of course, we're not seeing them as they actually are right this minute, we're seeing them as they were when the light began its track from those galaxies across space, to our telescope. And for some of these galaxies in these deep fields, those galaxies are billions of what we call light years away a light year is a unit of distance is the distance that light travels in a year. So when we see a galaxy that's billions of light years away, we're seeing it as it was billions of years back in time. And as that light has traveled across space to get to our telescope, it's traveled through space that is actually expanding, that creates what we call a red shifting effect, the light that we receive is redder than it was when it started, it's its journey. And sometimes that red shifting goes all the way into the infrared part of the spectrum, even beyond what Hubble can pick up. So for these most distant galaxies, we anticipate that a lot of them are shining most of their light in, in a wavelength that's become shifted into the infrared part of the spectrum that only the Webb telescope will pick up, it will pick up galaxies and see them that that the Hubble Deep fields haven't seen so we anticipate seeing even more galaxies with the Webb telescope than Hubble has seen. And yet Hubble can see galaxies in ways that the web won't be able to see Hubble can see the ultraviolet light from the more nearby galaxies. And we can then put a picture together as how as to how galaxies have changed. Over time, by comparing those early infant galaxies at the Webb telescope, we'll pick up with the galaxies that Hubble can see brightly in ultraviolet light that won't be as bright in the infrared light that Webb can see. And then all those intermediate galaxies that we pick up, the infrared light from the Webb telescope and the visible and ultraviolet light from Hubble, and we can put all that information together to make deep feels like we've never had before. So yes, we're going to see the same deals that Hubble has seen, Webb will look at and pick up more galaxies, and then other deep fields Webb will look at. And we will we're already doing preparatory science with Hubble knowing that we want to use Webb for the things that Webb uniquely can do, and can use it in complement with what Hubble can already do. So we're already doing what we call preparatory observations. With Hubble, that makes sure that we understand everything we can about these different fields of galaxies with Hubble, so that we know just the kinds of things we want to learn with JT VST. And we use that telescope as efficiently as we can, once it gets going. You know, the Webb telescope is anticipated as we record this to be launching in late December. But it'll take several months for it to get out where it will be perched a million miles more and more from Earth. That's a lot farther away than Hubble is, but it's being put that far away from Earth to keep it very cool. So that it can pick up the faintest infrared light from these distant galaxies, and from these closer to home star forming regions. So we won't be getting science images from the web for quite a few months, as it makes this trek out into a much more distant part of space than the Hubble telescope. So we're gonna have to be patient. But I'm looking forward to those first science images coming in, in the in the middle part of 2022. If all goes well, Zack Jackson 48:57 so when we do start to get those images, wow, if they're in the infrared, what will they look like to us humans? Will they have to be artificially colored? Or? Jennifer Wiseman 49:09 Yes, so so the the Webb telescope will see red light that we can see. But then beyond read into the infrared that we cannot see. And the Hubble itself also sees Light We Cannot See. So Hubble picks up visible light that we can see. But Hubble's picks up ultraviolet light that we can't see and also near infrared light that we cannot see. So already with Hubble images, we have to give them colors that our eyes can see so that we can have a picture to look at. So for Hubble images, if you read carefully, it will tell you whether what you're seeing is visible light or if it's for example, near infrared light, it will be given a red hue so that you can see that part of the spectrum showing up In in the eyes, your colors your eyes can see, we usually label the things on Hubble images. So you know exactly what the color coding is. The Webb telescope images will be likewise sort of translated into colors that we can see in pictures and photographs so that the part of the infrared spectrum that is closer to visible light will be colored, a little less red, maybe even blue. And the part of the infrared spectrum that the web will pick up that's deeper into the infrared part of the spectrum will be colored, very red. And so you'll you'll see probably a, a, a legend that, you know, next to these James Webb images that tell you the range of colors that it's actually picking up and what that has been translated to in the colors that have been put into the image, it's, it's not just any color goes these, usually what happens is you try to make the color range that's on the image as close to the span of color as the actual information is, but just transferred over into a band that our eyes can see. So yes, you have to do something, or else you couldn't see it, with our eyes looking at a picture, because we can't see infrared light. And the same is already true with Hubble images that go beyond just the visible light of the spectrum. Ian Binns 51:35 I'm just in awe. It's just, I've always loved astronomy, and you know, it's something that I've always just been passionate about. What is it that you're most excited about? And I'm sorry, I just you know, in listening to you talk about it, you may have talked some already. But with this, the Webb Space Telescope, the Nancy Grace, Roman, and telescope and all these different ones that are coming, what is it that you're most excited about with these things? Jennifer Wiseman 52:06 I think I'm most excited about what you might call two extremes of the spacial scale of the Universe. With these new telescopes, like the the Webb Space Telescope, and then later the Roman Space Telescope. I'm excited about getting even a better understanding of how the universe we live in has become hospitable over billions of years for life, we can actually, you know, look at the earliest galaxies and compare them to galaxies, like our own Milky Way and intermediate time galaxies as well. And we can see how they've changed over these billions of years of time, we can't follow an individual galaxy as it changed. But we can look at the whole population at these different epochs of time. And we can tell that galaxies have merged together and become bigger over time we think our own Milky Way is the project product of mergers. And we can tell that stars have come and gone in these galaxies, massive stars don't live that long. And so they they produce heavier elements that we need four planets in life. As they shine, they, they they go through a process, a process called Fusion that creates heavier elements. And then when the massive stars become unstable, and run out of fuel, they explode and disperse that material into these interstellar clouds where the next generations of stars form. So we know there's been several generations of stars building upon prior generations. And all that process does is to create heavier elements that enable things like planets to form around star. So in our own galaxy, when stars are still forming, we see them forming with discs of dusty debris and planets forming around them. We know that that's only possible because of previous generations of stars in the galaxy that have created heavier elements. So as as we look at this process of the whole universe, the whole cosmos becoming more hospitable to life over eons of time, and that fascinates me and I'm excited with these new telescopes to get a greater sense of how that process has worked. And that personally feeds my, my faith, my sense of offer, how our universe has been endowed with what we need for for life and eventually the ability to have these kinds of conversations to exist and to think about our purpose and our existence and to contemplate on greater meaning. So that excites me and then much closer to home. I really am excited about observations within our solar system, I like the idea that we, with these new telescopes can also study details about planets and moons in our own solar system. And also that we're sending probes, you know, the the kind of space exploration that got me excited in astronomy in the first place. Where are these probes that humans have constructed and sent out to send back images of other planets and their moons in our solar system, I still think that's the the one of the greatest things humans have done and can do, if we put our heads together and do constructive international cooperations. And so I'm excited about probes that will go to places like Europa in our own solar system, in the coming years, that's an ice covered moon that we know has water ocean underneath, I'd like to know what what that water is like, you know, and there are missions that are already sampling the region around Jupiter, and have probed the environment of Saturn. These are things that excite me. And so I'm looking forward also to probe and telescope studies of our own solar system in the coming years. That's our own backyard. And we can learn a lot about even our own planet, by studying our sister planets in our own solar system. So those are the things I'm most excited about. Zack Jackson 56:29 Do you think we're going to find life on Venus? Jennifer Wiseman 56:33 Venus is harsh. Venus is is hot, and you know, really inhospitable to life as we know it. Now you can say, well, what if there's life, that's not as we know it? But, you know, we've all watched a lot of science fiction. But the trouble is, we have to know how to identify life, what is life? And so we have to start with what we know, which is life, even in the most extreme conditions on planet Earth. And, you know, what, what are they? The conditions, even the most extreme ones that in which life can thrive? There's a whole field called astrobiology right? Now, that's, that's a new field. But it's a very vibrant field where scientists are trying to understand what are the even the extreme conditions in which life can exist in our own planet Earth? And then, how would that translate to environments in space, either in interstellar space or on other planets or other star systems? And then how would we identify it as life? You know, that's really the tough question, especially if you can't go someplace physically, you can only observe remotely, how would you know that? That's that there's life there? That's a hard question in the field of astrobiology is trying to address all those questions. One of the things I like about astronomy right now is it's very interdisciplinary. It's not that you know, astronomy is separate from geology, which is separate from physics, which is separate from chemistry. No, all these things are being used together now, including biology to try to understand environments of other star systems and planets. And you know, how these conditions of stellar radiation and geology and atmospheres and chemistry work together and how that might affect even biology. So everything is very interdisciplinary now. And I just encourage people to get excited about space exploration, even if that's not your professional feel, there's so much you can learn and enjoy, even if it's not your occupation. By paying attention online, what's going on Hubble Space Telescope images are all freely available online, you can go to the website nasa.gov/hubble. And learn about it are also the galleries at Hubble site.org. And see any of these amazing images I've been talking about. The other telescopes that are large and space are on the ground also have magnificent websites with images. So you can learn a lot just by paying attention online. And I hope everybody also encourages young people to go into science fields or to realize that science is relevant to all walks of life, not just if you're thinking about becoming professional involved in space, but if you're thinking about just about anything, science is relevant to what you do. Science is relevant to our food to communications, to our health, to our exploration of oceans, and mountains, even on this planet, so I hope everybody takes a sense of time to just look around the natural world right around you. be appreciative of the wildlife and the trees and the natural world in a pretty Science as a way of studying that natural world but but keep a sense of wonder and awe. That's how I would encourage everyone to walk away from a program like this. Zack Jackson 1:00:11 Well, thank you so much for that. Yeah. And Ian Binns 1:00:13 I'll give a great ending. Zack Jackson 1:00:14 I'll give a plug for we did an episode on on astrobiology back in January that you all should check out if you haven't had a chance to read Adams book. What is it living with tiny aliens? The image of God and the Anthropocene? Right, am I getting that subtitle? Right? He's not here. He's one of our CO hosts. He's not with us today to plug his own book. But thank you so much for the the wonder the all the inspirations hope. There's a lot to get excited about. Yeah, thank you. Jennifer Wiseman 1:00:45 My pleasure. I'm glad you're interested in and I'm sure there'll be many more conversations to come have
Episode 95 As much of the US is caught in the grips of yet another wave of COVID-19 infections from the Delta variant, a new, sinister sounding mutation has been making news. The Omicron Variant. What is it? Why is it noteworthy? How is it different from Delta? The answers may surprise you. Frequent guest and expert on the evolution and spread of pathogens, Dr Daniel Janies answers your questions about this new variant as we discuss unknown viral lineages, where this all is going, and what role white tailed deer may have in the future of this pandemic. Dr Daniel Janies is an American scientist who has made significant contributions in the field of evolutionary biology and on the development of tools for the study of evolution and spread of pathogens. He is The Carol Grotnes Belk Distinguished Professor of Bioinformatics and Genomics at University of North Carolina at Charlotte. He is involved with research for the United States Department of Defense, and has advised multiple instances of the government on methods for disease surveillance. Colby T Ford, Denis Jacob Machado, Daniel A Janies Predictions of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant (B.1.1.529) Spike Protein Receptor-Binding Domain Structure and Neutralizing Antibody Interactions Jacob Machado, D., White, R., Kofsky, J., & Janies, D. (2021). Fundamentals of genomic epidemiology, lessons learned from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and new directions. Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology, 1(1), E60. doi:10.1017/ash.2021.222 ------------------------- Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Ian Binns 00:06 So, today we are welcoming back up a frequent guest, our resident expert, all things COVID. He is the University North Carolina or is that UNC Charlotte with me, and he's the Carolina greatness, Belk Distinguished Professor of bioinformatics and genomics. And we are really excited to welcome back to the show, Dr. Daniel Janis. So thank you for joining us again, Dan, we're excited to have you as we are continuing to navigate all of this changing world of COVID. Yeah, thanks for having me. You know, we reached out to you right away of just, Hey, there's this new variant out there. And so we wanted to kind of pick your brain a little bit of what is the Omicron variant? I know, there's been other variants that have emerged, some that emerged that there was nothing about it and others like delta, but what is it about this one that raised concerns that you know, who classified it as something special, I can't remember their categorization but something a variant of concern? So what does that was that mean? Can you what can you tell us? Dan Janies 01:06 What's interesting about Omicron is it contains 60 mutations with respect to Wuhan virus that emerged late 2019, in Delta contains 46. And what was interesting about Alpha through delta is that you could see them in in a lineage and, you know, nested set of mutations, building, and each one was, you know, incrementally more efficient than the other. What's different about Omicron is, we don't know where it came from. And it's not really in those lineages. And of those 60 mutations. 37 of them are in the spike protein, which is the protein that the virus uses to interact with human cells. So there's a lot of open questions with respect to those, especially those 37 mutations in the spike protein. Ian Binns 02:04 So like, what, what kinds of questions I mean, what is it that when you saw this and your team and other teams around the world, I mean, what what kinds of things just popped in your head right away of what what you needed to study or questions you want to answer? Dan Janies 02:17 The main thing is like, what did those mutations do to the conformation of the virus with respect to the antibodies that your body produces, after vaccination and or after infection, and in our early computational predictions, we predict that the antibodies produced by vaccination will be much less efficient in their ability to neutralize Omicron. need Ian Binns 02:51 exactly what we want to hear. Dan Janies 02:52 We've already seen this, you know, with with Delta, hence the, you know, the breakthrough in factions. And we, it's so it's, it's, it's more of the same, I mean, we expect more breakthrough infection. We don't know that much about transmissibility yet. What's interesting about Omicron is one of the key mutations that allowed delta to be so much more transmissible in outcompete previous variants is also in our con, but it's in a little bit different. It's in the same position, but a little bit different amino acid change. So the remains to be seen what that means, early data very early data out of South Africa, where this has been going on since mid November shows that Omicron is starting to outcompete Delta, but it's so early that epidemiological data will take some time to know to come in and numbers. Zack Jackson 03:52 Is there any indication yet of how virulent it is? how dangerous it is? Dan Janies 03:59 That the South African doctors are saying it's in the vaccinated, you know, they are seeing breakthrough infections, but they're mild cases, just like, you know, Delta, you know, sort of summer cold, so to speak, and hospitalizations, that data even lags, you know, even more, but hopple hospitalizations are not yet up for the unvaccinated. It couldn't be much more severe. We just, we just don't know. Zack Jackson 04:24 Do you see that as the the eventual trajectory of COVID in general, is it going to go the way of becoming more transmissible but less deadly, so it just kind of settles in our population? Some Dan Janies 04:36 people think that's the case. It's hard to predict how many more variants there are, since this one was not incremental, so to speak on the others in terms of its evolution, there might be a lot more space, you know, available for code to vary in that the problem is is that we have the tools now you know, least in the in the developed world. Anybody who wants to vaccination can, or two or three can get one. And B, we're not accepting it. So that leaves a pocket of people that delta, or Omicron, in this case, can use to infect and replicate itself and produce new variants. So that's a situation we really found ourselves in. Ian Binns 05:20 If I, if I may, I'm just curious. I was something I heard the other day on, on someone else was speaking about this. And so I'm curious. The first SARS that was detected, you know, it spread but not wildly around the world like this. Right. And I know we talked in our original episode, we had you on the distinctions here between SARS cov. One SARS, cov. Two. But one of the things I think that the person said, and I can I can't remember the name right now, but what he said was, is that when a virus is more deadly, what that may be one reason why it doesn't spread so much is because orphan acts very quickly and kills a host quickly that doesn't have the opportunity to spread, like one that is not as deadly. Does that make sense? Dan Janies 06:09 Yeah, yeah. So you're talking about SARS. cov. Oh, some people say SARS cov. One to distinguish it from SARS cov. Two, which we're experiencing now, there was only about 800 cases. And you know, it was much more deadly, but spread less efficiently leaving SARS cov. Two, and that's one of the things one of the Harbinger's of Delta's that it is out competing other viruses, because when it infects you, it's replicating itself so much faster, and it's getting out faster. And it's not causing symptoms as it's getting out of people as people are shedding it. And so people are even walking around more than spreading it more often. It's making so many more copies of it than its predecessors to. Ian Binns 06:55 Okay, and so that's, that's what makes this one, just SARS, cov. Two in general, from the very beginning, there's one of the reasons why it spreads so quickly is because we don't know we have it in that, right. I mean, if we go back to Dan Janies 07:08 ever ever more with very nervous. I mean, that's that was good. And Ian Binns 07:11 now that's even more Dan Janies 07:12 that was how Delta became so successful is was spreading, what SARS cov, two was spreading naysmith eyston, dramatically, Delta ramped it up. Ian Binns 07:24 So another question we have for you, is, you know, if if Omicron does indeed show to be a model, milder variant of the virus, you know, with less risk, someone was curious, or, you know, we reached out to listeners, and what they were curious about is that, if that is the case, does it make sense for it to spread throughout the world largely unchecked, like just, this is kind of the whole some, you know, as you said, that there are is a pocket of the population, especially in the US, and the developed in the the world where we have easy access to vaccines, where people do not want to get it for whatever reason, the vaccination. And so is it someone have said, Oh, we should just let it go unchecked? And so I'm just curious, is there Dan Janies 08:08 Yeah, that was tried in Sweden early on. And conditions are somewhat different there. They have a lot of people who live in their own house by themselves and things like that. But it was a regretted decision, because it was terrible for the for the elderly, you know, you can have most of the population get a cold, but the people that are vulnerable elderly, the immunocompromised people with other underlying conditions, your you're subjecting them to, you know, to a deadly disease in their case. So that was so those of Ian Binns 08:44 us who can get vaccinated, it's good to do that. So that we slow the potential risk to others who are unable to get vaccinated. That's the whole point of vaccines in anyway. Right, is there are those who are unable to get vaccinated for whatever reason you're medically in any kind of vaccine. And so they rely on those of us who can't get vaccinated to do it so that they can. Dan Janies 09:04 Yeah, I think it's an interesting choice in medicine, and that you're not only protecting yourself, but you're protecting those around you. And that, that's probably why No, the arguments hard to swallow for a lot of people. Ian Binns 09:18 Right, right. Yeah. Zack Jackson 09:20 I mean, if, if it came naturally, to care about your neighbor, then every religion in the world wouldn't have to make it their number one rule. It was just, they would just do it. But it turns out, it's really hard to convince people to think about other people's well being. Yeah, so it seems like we are, it seems like we're getting more variants like like we're just, we just work it up through Delta. I know out here, they're they're still talking about this delta wave. We've just hit the highest number in our in our county in the delta wave. And now we're talking about another variant. Is there an accelerating impact in this? And is that going to mean? Are we going to see more more quickly? Or is this going to make it harder to end this waking nightmare? Dan Janies 10:15 We just don't know. And the big surprise of Aamir Khan was, it is so different looking. Most of its mutations are not shared by delta. And so, nor any other Coronavirus such that it really made us wonder several things about where it came from. And it's such a surprise, I can't answer your question. You know, maybe a month ago, I would have said something, you know, about the pace of variance. But this really throws a monkey wrench and all that. Zack Jackson 10:55 Can you can you talk a little bit more about about that. Like how do we get something that is so far out in left field that doesn't that like a long lost cousin that we didn't get? So Dan Janies 11:06 there is somebody SARS cov two, okay, so it's not short on the virus. There are several speculations. And I'll just preface this by saying there's, there's no data for any of these that I've seen, I'd like to see some data, but much like alpha, which was first called the UK variant. The speculation there was that immune compromised person had been affected with SARS cov two, and the infection sustained itself in their body and was not fought against by their body. And therefore SARS cov to cut can vary within the person. I heard the metaphor the other day, that situations like an evolutionary gym, where in which stars go v2 can try out, get stronger and try out new tricks. So and then it emerged from this hypothetical person. And then there was not much speculation after that for for alpha, and we saw the other variants becoming just, you know, incrementally better alpha, beta, gamma, delta. The interesting thing about Omicron is that it is not connected to any of these lineages evolutionarily deep, you know, very deep in the early emergence of SARS, cov do we can tell it SARS, cov, two and there that brought up other speculations that SARS cov to from people went into an animal animal population, use them as this, you know, metaphorical evolutionary gym and then reemerged into people. And this is not far fetched SARS, cov, two in the Netherlands, for example. And then Denmark, infected from humans, firing minx using the fair trade, and came back out into infect people. We know in the American Midwest, the stars, Kobe to somehow in whitetail deer. They're not farm, they're wild. But they're friendly, and then accustomed to people, especially in the American suburbs. So that is, still remains to be seen any connections there any evolutionary connections, and the third, which I think is more of a, you could say it's a third problem, or kind of an overarching problem, which there's some debate in the surveillance community is that we thought we were doing a great job, you know, sequencing the heck out of SARS, cov. Two cases, but maybe we're just not doing a very good job. And this thing was under the radar. It was first identified in Botswana in a aids lab, but then identified in mass in South Africa. But then, once people had the sequence to Qian and the Netherlands, they found a bunch of cases and travelers returning to Northern Europe, from South Africa. But then they went back into their on yet to be sequence samples. And they found they had early November, mid November cases. So as we go back, we might find more about this. And we just wrote a paper should be out soon, where we'll review that. There are many cases in many countries in the world where even though we're doing a tremendous job and sequencing cases, you can do a back of the envelope calculation that shows we're not doing enough to catch every variant. And so I think this latter scenario of just under surveying, it would be just a Herculean task to survey everything, but under surveying is going to produce these things and that could account For the animal reemergence case and can account for the, the immunocompromised case. So under surveying is a, I think a blanket explanation. Zack Jackson 15:10 Yeah, I've heard that that was white tailed deer have it in such large numbers in the places for their testing, it was like 75%, or something I read, and that it doesn't, it doesn't kill them. And so it's like, it's like a little, a little playground for them. And if it comes back, and I when I saw that article pop up, that was the first time in the past few years, I felt legitimately hopeless, was on well, it doesn't matter how much we vaccinate if the white tailed deer population, which is all over my garden is is going to be carriers, then what hope do we have? Ian Binns 15:49 Do you want to address that question, Dan? Or do we just I mean, Zack Jackson 15:54 if there's no hope to be had, Dan Janies 15:58 it's speculation when it was discovered in whitetail deer, and nobody was talking about Omicron. So I don't know if there's a real connection there. There's a there's a danger there always. Ian Binns 16:08 So someone you know, another question that emerged for us was, you know, how does SARS cov to compare to other viruses in terms of how fast it mutates? And I'm sorry, I was looking off. So if this is related to what Zack already asked me, Is there a there's not a set speed or just happen? Dan Janies 16:24 Yeah, it's it's, it's relatively slow. And the odd thing is SARS didn't SARS. cov two didn't really mutate until mid 2020. I thought sequencing would be quite boring. And then one mutation occurred. And people who pointed that out got quite famous. Because that mutation became fixed. And on subsequent SARS cov. Two cases, in then, we started to realize that mutations were building up. And this whole concept of variants really took off late 2020, early 2021. And then we realized, especially in the UK, that the variants were more efficient in their replication, and thus their transmission. And then it got really interesting to start sequencing variants, but it wasn't a fast process by any means us about comparing to influenza, which is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison, but influenza does not only in its own right, evolve faster, but it's a different genome structure. SARS, cov. Two is just one very long genome. Whereas influenza has eight chromosome like segments to its genome. So those segments, when a person or an animal's co infected with two different lineages, they can reassort it's called, or its kin to shuffling a deck of cards and dealing out different poker hands. So it has not only the mutational avenue to change, but the reassortment Avenue and the we don't see that in SARS, cov. Two now, even though it's theoretically possible could recombine with, but it's not as able to be as it's not segmented, like informed roles. Ian Binns 18:08 So with the mRNA technology that we have, with at least two of the vaccines that are approved in the US, at least, what can be done with those that technology, the mRNA vaccines to be able to handle this variant or future variants, especially ones that could potentially be much worse? Dan Janies 18:28 Yeah. Well, the mRNA vaccines are, they can be just, you know, in essence reprinted and the main makers would like to argue that they can just reprint it and reformulate it and have it ready. I think Maderna said by March. So matter of months, the regulators probably want to some in would be wise to do you know, clinical trials before it's used. So, you know, it's really the vaccine productions, you know, almost immediate, but, you know, I think there's going to be a regulatory period as well, they did start to make reformulations of the mRNA vaccines for alpha and delta. But it turned out the vaccines that they that we had, you know, were already approved, or EUA, at least mergency youth authorization. were effective enough. And so the question is, where do you take on a whole new regulatory pathway versus you have something that's still really good? I mean, we're going to talk about going down in efficiency, I think, and in vaccine efficient efficacy, and for me in terms of Omicron and delta, but they're still wildly good. I mean, a flu vaccine some years is only 30% or 50% effective and, you know, nobody, nobody writes home about that. And so if we go from 96%, effective to 75%, effective for SARS, cov, two vaccines, even those directives against wild type Wuhan virus when applied to Delta, or Omicron, we're still, you know, in the black, so to speak, we're still doing pretty good, you know? Ian Binns 20:09 Right. But they would have to if if something happened, and you know, a variant emerged, and, you know, the current vaccines we have, are not working very well, we need to make something needs to change. Obviously, they would need to go back through that clinical trials process. Dan Janies 20:28 Again, right, just I believe so I believe they should. Yeah. Okay. I mean, there might be regulatory regimes around the world where they don't but Ian Binns 20:35 okay. But it's still significantly faster than what anything we've had prior to these mRNA vaccines, like the process is still faster because of the technology that's available to us now, Zack Jackson 20:46 is that at all possible to anticipate future mutations and create future proofed vaccines? Dan Janies 20:54 Yeah, I've been thinking about that a lot. I think we're doing great as it is, but I think we could look at the number of possibilities for making a stable, you know, Spike protein and calculate those structures. And, and sort of anticipate the function of them, I think the latter part is the foreign part is easy, we can calculate out our structures, the understanding what they mean is a little harder than the understanding what they mean, you know, biochemically is a little harder, and then the understanding what they mean, epidemiologically is even harder. So, you know, we see this 30% reduction of 36 upwards of 36% reduction of efficiency against current antibodies by Omicron. But we don't know what that means yet, you know, in the real world, so. So, I mean, we could we could make computers run really hard, but it'd be hard to hard to translate that to the real world. That's a great idea, though. I think it's something we should strive for. Zack Jackson 21:54 Now. I mean, that seems like it would be easier if the viruses were progressing incrementally, like you said, but with something like Omicron, that pops up out of the blue. Dan Janies 22:04 Yeah, yeah. There are many ways to skin the cat when there might be a very large number of many ways to make an efficient to make an efficient SARS cov. To that, and we have not until Omicron thought that way. Now, we're, you know, when thinking that way for the last two weeks, Zack Jackson 22:20 how do you? How are there multiple ways to skin cats? Isn't it Ian Binns 22:26 wondering where that was? Come? Yeah, pull it off. Dan Janies 22:30 I like the idea here. Zack Jackson 22:34 Kendra's not here to defend cat giant, Dan Janies 22:38 often the metaphor of a landscape is used. And so you have a hilly, imagine a landscape with many hills and the hills are optimal viruses, right. And it's, it's sometimes thought it's hard to go from one hill to another, you can kind of like go up the hill a little bit, you can go alpha, up to delta up the hill. And then when you're on the top, you're kind of stuck in one evolutionary space. But you got Omar Khan on this other hill over here. And so it's hard to imagine being less efficient to get more efficient. But what happens, I think, is that there's a set of contingencies, certain mutations happen that allow others to happen, and therefore evolutionary evolutionarily SARS, cov, two starts climbing a new Hill, so to speak. And there may be many hills of deficiency out there of evolutionary peaks. Okay, Ian Binns 23:30 can we go back to the white that the deer situation? I mean, when we when you learn that emerged, or that it was detected in the deer population? What does that mean? Like for the human population and stuff? I mean, we talked about not really going away. So since it's not, doesn't appear to be deadly to that population. But is it easy for it to jump back to us from them? Or do we know? Dan Janies 23:54 We don't know. And it's largely dismissed. I mean, the whole notion of zoonosis I think, in general is very important. We don't like to think of reverse zoonosis because we're clean and animals are dirty, but we're just another kind of animal, right? So we just see, we sometimes give bacteria and viruses to animals, and they're not being treated, but by and large, right, so the virus can live amongst them and evolve with them. And yeah, this is true influenza fun, fundamentally comes from birds. We know all these coronaviruses are many, you know, many of them, clinically important ones we're familiar with come from bats. And that's the idea of a reservoir that the virus is in the wild and ever so often infects people and then we pay attention to it. Zack Jackson 24:40 That that will always stick with me from our first episode that you said the reason why these seem to come from bats, this goes back to have such great immune systems and nothing kills them. And they fly around viruses bounce around. Yeah, and fly around. What have you been thinking about in terms of this? This virus What's interesting to you? Dan Janies 25:01 I really would like to know where it comes from. I mean, and I really think it's probably under sequencing and how much I'm wondering how much money and effort we're going to spend to deeply survey viruses. I'm not against it, but and we, you know, we can do it. It's just a matter of political Well, yeah, I'm wondering where the political will is gonna take us and a lot of these things, you know, the President's already said, we're not doing lockdowns. I thought that was the state's decision now. But I think this might be Yeah, might be a point where we're going to just decide to live with the pandemic. Unfortunately, Zack Jackson 25:38 it does seem that way. It does seem like I looked at cases the other day was like, wow, this is nearly the highest single day that we've ever had. And it looks like it did three years ago when I walk into Target. Yeah. And see, I was just talking with a member of my church who is forget her official title, I'm sorry, Amanda. But she's a big wig in the emergency department of the local hospital and asked her how things are going. And she said, it's, it's heartbreaking, Nick, they're, they've lost like 60% of their staff, and the outside world is acting as if nothing is happening inside. And so all these health care professionals are like, they're completely burnt out. And they've lost their faith in humanity. And they're just, they're done. And it seems like Alright, so this is the new normal, we're just going to normalize dying. And Dan Janies 26:37 yeah, so we can't, we can't live with very Chris, we, you know, we can't make doctors and nurses very fast. That's a lot of training. And it takes the right kind of person. And so maybe that's the response to this, we're just going to live with it. Because we know, we have to have doctors, nurses, and everybody who makes hospitals wrong. So imagine all the ancillary effects. People are not getting their cancer screens not getting their teeth fixed or not getting their surgeries, if the hospitals full well, healthcare effects are going to be tremendous. We have a study here on campus of the adherence to prep treatment for HIV. And we've seen that gone down in in the COVID period as well. Ian Binns 27:29 I remember when delta started taking off, you know, we used to live in Louisiana, and there was a hospital system down there in Baton Rouge that talked about that the chief medical officer actually said that because the numbers were so out of control there, that they talked about, that we something along the lines of that they were no longer an efficient system or something along those lines. Because their numbers, they were so overwhelmed. That it they were trying to make it clear to people who are unwilling to get vaccinated prior to the emergence of delta, that the even things his car accidents and stuff like that, that they would not be able to be seen, because they were just that overwhelmed. And trying to send the message home to those who were adamantly opposed to vaccinations that the only reason why this is happening because you're not getting vaccinated. Right. And so that's what they were trying to bring home. Dan Janies 28:25 Yeah, pre COVID. There was already a crisis in rural America, small hospitals were closing in, in, in towns that were not being near big cities. Right. So don't, don't get drawn to me don't get hurt in the country, that's for sure. Ian Binns 28:42 Yeah. Which was this I remember when that happened with the when delta emerged, and it really took off, and I was here. And then I just kept looking at, you know, my wife and just kind of saying that this is the US like, you don't think of stuff like that. That's not supposed to happen the United States of America, right. And but as you just said, pretty COVID rural hospitals were shutting down and medical care and stuff. But everyone always talks about, you know, we're the greatest and we have all the best medical care and blah, blah, blah, but then we're turning people away, like doctors, which I'm aware that that's not the case. But you know, it just was it was tough to hear, again, to be reminded of the fact that this is not over. Zack Jackson 29:24 Wealthy people and propagandists say that we have the best health care system in the world. But right. I think most folks would disagree with that. Yeah. Ian Binns 29:34 But it's just an interesting perspective being shared. And to hear again, you know, chief medical officer saying, we don't have the ability to care for you right now. Yeah, it was very eye opening. Zack Jackson 29:46 So if you want to give your give your local healthcare provider, a merry Christmas, happy Hanukkah, or Kwanzaa, whatever they celebrate by getting vaccinated. Yeah. Ian Binns 29:59 When I remember Dan You and I were part of a panel. And it's still funny to think of this. I think it was like February of 2020. Near the end of February and as before things really took off. Yeah. So we know lock downs were in place yet and compared to now very few cases were in the US that we knew of at the time. And we kind of talked about in that panel about, you know, and, and people were asking about, you know, if this gets out of control here in the US, what about lockdowns, all that kind of stuff? We just kind of kept talking about the acceptable level of loss. Like, you know, and then I remember you pulled up a slide talking about the number of flu deaths every year. Yeah. That we were having time. And so we just, that was considered an acceptable level of loss by society, not, you know, into an individual person, obviously. But it sounds like that may be where some are trying to go. Like, you see some just saying, I'm done. I'm not, ma'am. This is over for me. Dan Janies 30:56 Yeah, I don't think it by design. And I don't think those that's why I showed those slides. And, you know, I don't think people really consider fluid deadly disease, but it is if you're, if the wrong underlying conditions, you know, so now we've got another one that, you know, before we especially before we had the tools, there is some right side, we do have tools now for we've had, you know, influenza vaccines and antivirals now we're getting to the stage where we have, you know, better vaccines than we did for influenza for, you know, for SARS, cov. Two, and there are some new antivirals. I think that will probably be some bright side and the gloomy picture we've been painting that even unvaccinated people can take a regime of these antivirals and less than their illness. Okay, I'm sorry, infection. Zack Jackson 31:49 Yeah. So thank you so much. Ian Binns 31:53 Yeah. Thanks. Is there anything else you want to share with us? Based on what you guys you and your teams have been studying the past couple weeks? Um, Dan Janies 32:01 yeah, I'll send you the I'll send you the paper. One is we we, we predicted the, you know, even though we surveillance looks Herculean right. Now that it's not, we wrote that. And, you know, we predicted time will tell the clinic, but we predict now that vaccines will be less efficient against Aamir Khan than the previous version. So we'll see. Ian Binns 32:28 Okay. And we can link to that in the show notes. Yeah, be great. All right. Well, thanks, Dan. I appreciate you. Dan Janies 32:35 Thanks. Thanks for talking again.
Episode 93 In part 5 of our mental health miniseries, we're talking about what makes us who we are. If our brain is the center of our personalities and identities, what happens when our brains get broken? Rachael tells us the curious story of Phineas Gage as well as her own experience with traumatic brain injury. Along the way, we will talk about split brains, manipulative microbiomes, and hungry ghosts. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are Ian Binns 00:14 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte, in my favorite brain character is crying from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Zack Jackson 00:27 Zack Jackson UCC pastor in Reading Pennsylvania and my favorite cartoon brain character is the brain from Arthur Kendra Holt-Moore 00:36 Kendra Holt-Moore, assistant professor of religion at Bethany College in Lindsborg Kansas. And my favorite brain is the brain in those comics, I think they're like from PhD comics or something, but it's like a brain and a heart that are always talking. And the hearts like, I'm gonna go catch a butterfly and the brains like no, we need to work. Rachael Jackson 01:06 Rachael Jackson, Rabbi at Agoudas, Israel, congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina, and my favorite cartoon brain, brain from pink in the brain, especially their line. What are we going to do tonight? The same thing we do every night Pinky try to take over the world. I use that when anyone in my family asks, What are we going to do? Because it turns out, they never actually take over the world. And this is for all y'all that watch this TV show in the 1990s kids WV in Zack Jackson 01:44 the late 1900s. Rachael Jackson 01:48 So if you have no idea what I'm talking about, I'm sure you can find it somewhere. But I haven't looked yet. So pinky in the brain is awesome, because they're going to take over the world. But they never end up taking over the world. Because, well, the laboratory mice. So why are we asking this question? Why did we want to talk about our favorite brain characters. And that's because today I want to start us by talking about our actual brains. As much as we might enjoy the comics are cartoons of brains and the way that we anthropomorphize and frankly, anthropomorphize them, they are just a part of our bodies, like every other part of our bodies, except not at all, like every other part of our bodies, because they can troll the rest of our bodies. And we might have this inclination to think that our brains have, again, like the rest of our bodies, oh, well, if something happens to it, you know, me, you put it in a cast, right, you break out, you break a bone, you set it, you get a scrape, or cut, you sew it up. But what happens when your brain matter gets damaged, it also can bruise, it also can shrink and get cuts, it also has the ability to suffer physical damage. And one of the biggest things that happens when that when the brain itself is damaged, is that our personalities can change. Our emotions can change, which is why I really love what Kendra brought in as her example, that it's the heart and the brain, these comics, that for so long in our American culture, the emotions are kept in the heart. And the rational thought is kept in the brain. But we really know that that's not at all true. The heart has no emotions, the heart pumps blood and receives blood and recycles blood like it's that's all it does. Not that that's an all like Zack Jackson 04:11 if there's any hearts out there, listen kind of sorry. Rachael Jackson 04:15 I apologize if I hurt your feelings heart. But hearts don't have feelings. Right? Our feelings are all in our brains. Our personalities are all in our brains. And we forget that. And I want to bring in one of the most famous medical stories, people that they really started to understand this. So this was 19th century or so mid 19th century, and prior to this point, they had no idea where our personalities really came from and how they were formed. There's a whole lot of well, the shape of your skull dictates How Your personality is? Well, that's weird. Case. In case that needs to be said. I mean, it's almost it's almost as backwards as The Little Mermaid cartoon, right? The show or the movie, excuse me, The Little Mermaid. And the seagull goes up to the prince. And they say, Is he alive? And what does he do? The Seagull puts the ear to the man's foot. Oh, yeah, he's right. It's like, what that's really, that's not how your body works. And we know that and we can laugh at that. Because that's how absurd it is. Well, a couple 100 years ago, they didn't know how our personalities worked at all. So by saying, Well, it's the shape of your head that dictates your personality. Okay? Why not? We have these ideas that maybe again, prior to this, and to this day, maybe it's when you were born, that dictates your personality, right? We all it for a lot of people. It's it's mostly used as a funny thing, and less deeply integrated into who they are like, what's your sign? Right? Well, I'm a Pisces, oh, well, if you're a Pisces, and these planets were rising, that means your personality is xy and z. And for some, there's a lot of truth in that. And for others, it's just a way of connecting and be like, Oh, that's when my birthday is to how fun that we still don't know exactly how our personality works unless you're in that field. So going back to the mid 19th century, there is a person who's named is Phineas Gage Pei, or, excuse me, pah is how you start his name, Phineas Gage. And he is, well, the typical youth of the 19th century blue collar worker. And he's working hard, working hard. And he finally says, I'm going to get a good job. And he gets a good job building the railroad. right way back when when we needed railroads to move us from one side to another part of the country. And so here he is a strapping man because frankly, in order to you know, lay railroad ties and put this stuff in, you have to be physically fit. And people around him, his friends and letters and stuff, his own notes, said, you know, had some fun, kind, reverence, upstanding, you know, still rapidly Strapping Young Lad. And so he gets promoted through the railroad. And now he's the manager, and he's, you know, like 2324 years old, and he's the manager of this railroad. And what they did back then is you don't just lay the railroad ties and, and hammer them in, you actually have to make space for the railroad, right, the ground has to be flat, the ground has to be ready. And if you're going over a mountain pass, or or a molehill or something, like you have to actually make the ground ready. And the way they did that is with explosives. So what they do is they basically dig a hole, and they put some gunpowder or TNT or something like that inside the hole, you know, a couple of meter or so down. And they pack it in. And they use a tamping iron to tap it in, right, basically, and this thing is usually four inches in diameter, and about a meter or three feet long, right? This is this is a big thing. This is not a small, small stick. So as the manager Phineas Gage is tamping this stuff in and because he was so well liked, he's talking his other people. His mouth is open, and it precisely at that moment with his mouth open, it goes off it this explosive explodes, and it's such a forceful explosion. And his mouth is open that the tamping iron goes through his mouth exits his skull and lands several dozen feet away Thank you, Zach. Yes, Ian Binns 09:41 that's yeah, so I'm sorry. I just I know you're talking sorry. You're good. Yeah, that was the part that I kept trying to figure out so it did exit his called they did not have to take it out. 09:52 No, no, it exit it like okay, it was Ian Binns 09:56 Did it get stuck in there and then yeah, okay. Rachael Jackson 09:59 No, no which is great. Yeah, but it didn't get stuck in there. Yeah, and so we're gonna, of course, put pictures and Wikipedia pages and medical journals, we're gonna put stuff like that in our show notes. Tangential aside, parenthetical aside, if I can remember to send them to Zach, so hopefully there'll be there. Anyway, so it exits his skull, and pupa. And he's still alive, and he's still breathing. And he's still walking. And people are like, Oh, my God, what do we do? Literally, this guy's head, like, his skull blew off? Zack Jackson 10:40 What do we do? Rachael Jackson 10:42 And so they take him to to his doctor, right? This is your just, it's just your run of the mill PCP. I don't know about you guys. But I don't think my PCP could handle this. So he goes to his PCP and the guy goes, okay, okay. Let's keep him alive. So we keep them alive. And they recognize, well, there is no skull fragment, so they can't capture the bone, they can't put the bone back, and his brain starts to swell. And it bleeds and so that's their number one, that's their number one focus is to stop the bleeding. Right? Because if you just bleed to death, well, there's nothing else to do. So if you're really interested in the medical part of this, again, I'll link I'll link the journal article that talks about it. So on and on, he recovers it takes about six weeks for like for him to recover to the point where he can be awake, right? So this is a long recovery in being awake. Right? It's it's very much a traumatic injury. But it happened in his brain. And he wakes up, and he really starts physically getting better, right? His his blood supply has returned back to normal. He's able to sit and eat and converse. And what people notice is that he's mean, and he's vulgar. And he says irreverent things all the time. And they have no idea what happened. So Phineas Gage, changed. And the doctor noticed this, too. And one of the lines from the doctor's report says, He is fitful, irreverent, indulging at time and the grossest profanity, which was not his previous custom, manifesting but little deference for his fellows. This doesn't sound like the same person. And so they're really trying to figure out what happens. And so Phineas Gage to end his story that is, Phineas Gage lives for another decade, decade and a half. And at one point, he goes to Chile as a long haul, or long distance stagecoach. And the long distance stagecoach, according to their job description required the driver to be reliable, resourceful, and possess great endurance. And above all, they had to have the kind of personality that enabled them to get on well with their passengers. Fascinating, also, not a job Island. No 19th century drive in the hills long distance of Chile. Hmm. So this was a job that he took. And then he started to feel ill and he went back to live with his mom who was at that point living in San Francisco, and he started to have major seizures. And he died before he was about 40. So sort of ends his life. His life story that is, but I bring this bring this stage coach piece, because that doesn't quite match what his doctor wrote that he was irreverent and spewing profanities. And remember, this is at a time in our American puritanical society that was like, oh, no, we can't say profanities. That's only for the bad people. We've changed our culture since then. Zack Jackson 14:23 Yeah. That least Whoa. This is Kellyanne. Ian Binns 14:31 You can bleep that out. Right? Don't Don't take it out, believe it, because I think it's perfect timing. Sounds good. Thank you. Rachael Jackson 14:40 So here we have a person who has changed. And the best understanding at that point was that his brain injury caused him to be a different person. And we now recognize that our medical science that that is completely true. that our personalities reside in the mush that is contained in our skulls. And if something happens to that mush, it's very soft material, if something happens to it, it can affect who we are. And that can be quite disturbing. And like as not even for a person going through it, but can you imagine, I can just say to you, right, I can say to Kendra, Kendra, you don't, you're not who you think you are. And that at any moment, if I cut off a slide of your slice of your brain, you're going to be a different person. And that kind of shakes our foundation of one of the things that we believe in our life to be in to be permanent, right, so much of our life is filled with impermanence, that we think well, at least who I am, unless I willingly change it unless I have the control to change who I am. And that control is part of my personality. Then it then I am who I am. And, and it goes, this is showing that it's not. And that can be disconcerting, especially when there are so very many medical diseases and challenges that affect the brain throughout life. One of the most common ones that we see in our society is dementia. Not just Alzheimer's, but dementia as a whole category of different of different illnesses that affect the brain. And I highly suggest if there's anyone in your family, if there's anyone that you work with, if these are patients that you care for, if you somehow engage with anyone that is in the population of those who have dementia, there's this book called the gems and the gems and dementia, a guidebook for care partners. And what it does is it walks a person through stages of dementia, and rest six stages of dementia. And it helps them recognize helps us recognize what a person might be going through, I'm not going to read you all six of them. But the titles are sapphire, diamond, emerald, Amber, Ruby, and ending with pearl. And what happens is in each of these different places, so let me let me read one of these to you. And this is the diamond, this is the second stage. And it sort of says cognitive characteristics. A person gets rigid, but does the best and does best with established routines and rituals can really do well at times, they can shine. And so it seems planned or on purpose. They can be hurtful or say mean things without seeming to notice or care. They talk and worry a lot about cost money and expenses. Different people will see them differently. Like we do diamonds and different facets, they can't seem to get it at times or won't let it go. Some family members are not sure if it's dementia versus just being mean stubborn, and forgetful. Dementia is really a brain disease. It's something that physically affects the physical mush of the brain. Now, I'm not a neuroscientist, I'm not a neuro surgeon. I'm not, I don't even play one on TV. So I cannot explain what's happening in those. But I trust those that do know what they're talking about. So I'm going to pause here and see if there's questions or reactions to the story and what I've just shared and then I'll move us into a slightly different direction. Ian Binns 19:23 So I've always found that, you know, prior to you sharing the link for that story, Phineas Gage you know, I've read it somewhere else before and was just so fascinated by it for multiple reasons. Obviously, the fact that he survived for so light, right? I mean, it's like, holy, sorry, there we go again. Good things not 1850s Right. So but uh, the other thing too is, you know, how much that accident advanced doctors at the time advanced their own understandings of the brain and led to like the development of different types of medical fields and scientific fields because of that accident. Okay, I just find that so fascinating. And, yeah, again, it's just it's, it's just insane to me that he survived that, and then what they're able to do with it? Rachael Jackson 20:22 No, thank you for that. I mean, and I love that you said that it that they learned from that this story. It happened in the 19th century is still in modern day textbooks and modern day classes. So my dad went to medical school starting in what year was that? 1998. And he learned a Phineas Gage in medical school. Right. I mean, there's, there's a reason that this person is so well known because of how he changed the understanding of what our brains are and what our personalities are. I hope I didn't cut you off there. Yeah. Ian Binns 21:02 No, not at all. It's again, it's just, it's really interesting. You know, that again, he survived what, how at advanced the medical community in the medical field. And then yesterday, when in preparing for today's recording, looking at some of the notes and things like that, that were written by the doctors, you know, that we have those those notes in their description of what was going on in the brain. You know, what they were able to witness of, like, some of these descriptions, or was it of like, you know, parts of brain matter coming out of the top of his head and stuff. I'm sitting there like, oh, my gosh, like Jess, who? That was, I was cringing while Reading it. It just like that just now I see why not doctor? medical doctor. Dr. Binns? That's right, that's right. Yeah, Kendra Holt-Moore 22:02 the thing that this story of Phineas Gage, and just the conversation about, like brain injury and personality, it reminds me of something that I learned, I think I learned about this when I was maybe at the end of my master's degree, or like, early PhD student and I went to some conference, but I, it was like, a conversation about the microbiome. And it was one of the first times or maybe the first time that I had heard someone talk about how there are neurons in our stomachs. And so it just is always really interesting, when, like, we talk about, like this topic of, it's really like a question about, you know, Who Who are we and, you know, how much do we are we sort of prone to just like, the impermanence of whatever happens to our bodies changes our experience of the world, but we like, have this idea of self, that, at least in like, a lot of cultures is, you know, in the brain, and for other people, it's maybe more in the heart, but there's also the gut, or like that, that, you know, we talk about, like our gut telling us what to do, or, you know, the, that feeling you get in the pit of your stomach when something is, you know, happening that you are unsure about, like, it's just, it's this other part of our physical experience that, you know, is also an option for how we like identify, like, the core of our self. And that's really interesting. And also just interesting to, like, bring in, I think, the, like medical, there's, I mean, I'm not a biologist, but I love like listening to and talking about the microbiome and that, like, just our relationship to our bodies, is not just a relationship to a body, its relationship to like, these, like millions of teeny tiny little things like micro organisms that help make up our body. And it's, you know, there's a plurality built into ourselves that we're not always like, aware of, but like, what does that mean in terms of selfhood, and personhood and personality and the way that we relate to people and love people and, you know, show respect and all these other like bigger questions about personhood, and they just become more interesting questions when you consider, like, the complexity of like the body itself, whether we're talking about the brain or, you know, those neurons in our guts, our gut brain, it's all just really cool. You know, Zack Jackson 24:57 that's why it's so hard to give up junk food. is when you have eaten a lot of junk food you have selectively bred in microbiome that that thrives off of that junk food. And that mic, those little microbes, then release chemicals into your blood, which tells your brain to get more of that junk food. And so your microbiome wants a certain kind of food, which you have selectively bred by your choices, and then your cravings, that you think this is my favorite food, because I love it. But it's really your favorite food, because all of the microorganisms that live in your belly love it, and you're just its host. And it's, it's telling you, they're telling you what you think that you actually like, but it's really just them. Rachael Jackson 25:42 But you're the ones that did selectively put them there, maybe they're the brains, you have the ability to change, or maybe they were always there. Right. And so maybe some people don't have Zack Jackson 25:52 much of your microbiome, from their mother, during the birthing process, when you are a blank slate, and those microbes can get in there and set up shop. And then yeah, you can you can take swabs of people, and you can tell who their mother is by the specific fingerprint of the microbiome we got. Yeah, it's crazy to think that we are, in many ways, like a mech suit for a whole host of, of microbes, more so than we are an independent person that just so happens to have a bunch of microbes that eat our food. Now, we are a universe in and of ourselves. I like that. Rachael Jackson 26:34 We tend to be so narcissistic into thinking that we are who we are. And we have complete control over this body that we inhabit. When the reality is far more complex than that. Right? Like you were just saying, right? How much control do we have over these things in our gut, especially when they're really imprinted? Like fingerprints, right? When they're imprinted in such a way that we can identify family lineage, right, which you have very little control over who your parents are. In fact, you have zero control over who your parents are. But we but we have this, this deep need to know that. And one of the hard parts is if we have that need for ourselves, do we not also have this need for other people in our lives? When we meet with a person, we go, Oh, I really like this person, we can be friends. And then you become friends. And then that person changes. Are you still friends with them? Does it matter how or why they changed if it was by choice or by happenstance? So I want to share a slightly personal story with us. In I'm actually forgetting what year this was. It must have been 2008. to that. Yeah, I think it was 2008 Is that the election was 2008. And Obama took office in January of oh nine. So this happened Christmas Day. 2008. So I'm 27. I'm 27 years old. And I just go up on a ski hill. I've skied before, but it's not a hobby, right? It's just something like, Oh, I've done it once or twice. I know, you know, I know that. If you want to slow down, you make a wedge. And if you want to speed up, you put your feet together and you know, go side to side. Cute little things like that. I wasn't being ridiculous. I was just staying on the green slopes. I was I was with my best friend at the time, who later became my husband. And I go on my second green run and I'm with his mom, and all the guys are off doing like black diamonds and something like Oh my God, I don't even know how people can do that. And my second run, it's Christmas time, and I fall. And I don't just like oops, hee hee hee. I fell on my tokus wasn't that funny? I'm a little embarrassed. i fall i garage sale, I fall down the mountain and the everything's on the yard, right? That sort of concept of the garage sale, like everything in my pockets. Like everything is off. Now, I knew I was going to do a green. So I didn't wear a helmet. Was that smart? I don't know. Maybe? I don't know. They didn't. This was again 2008. This was up in Colorado. They didn't necessarily offer how much to people that are just having this cute little fun time on a green slope. I don't know what to tell the person you just really have to ask a person that knows how to ski from now on like it's my suggestion that you wear a helmet because why not? You wear a helmet when you ride a bike and you go just As fast on skis as you do a bike, so that's my suggestion. I was not wearing one and I didn't even occur to me that I should have been wearing when one of my skis did not pop off like they are supposed to. And it just like twisted my leg as it was, as I was literally falling down the mountain. And so it stayed on and I had this massively strained and sprained ankle, so I couldn't walk. But as I'm falling, and I, I have this very distinct moment, where here a crack, like an actual crack, and then I, I'm laying there, and it's a beautiful day, so I'm laying in the snow looking at this blue sky, bright light. And, and I run my tongue around my teeth, because I thought the crack was my teeth breaking. And I was really scared that I was like, Oh, my God, teeth are so expensive, kid you not. That's what my thought was. Yeah, I was like, I broke my teeth and teeth are expensive. didn't occur to me, that I broke my brain didn't occur to me that I broke my neck did not occur to me. And then I was stupid. Because I was not thinking, like, I literally wasn't thinking and I was stupid. And I said, Sure, I can go on another run. And I somehow work through the pain of my ankle, went down the mountain, got back up on the chairlift started down again. And then I went, I'm getting dizzy, I think I need to lay down. And I just lay down in the snow. And my eyes were doing this weird thing. And it's like I couldn't see and they were just going so fast. This is a stress story. Imagine living it Kendra Holt-Moore 31:58 gone, don't worry. Yeah, that's what's helping you live. Ian Binns 32:04 So I live Kendra Holt-Moore 32:06 spoiler alert, I Rachael Jackson 32:06 don't die. And then then they call the rescue, right? They call the rescue the ski squad or whatever they're called. Because I still am in the middle of the mountain and I have to get down. And they take me to like a little cab out and they have a heart or something. And they brace my neck and they put me on a stretcher, so they can take me down. And I'm only told this I don't remember this. At this point, I have completely lost the ability of consciousness. I am a conscious, but I don't actually know that I'm conscious at this point. And so these guys are strapping me into the board. And I asked one of them for a kiss. Is everything okay? I was like, Well, you could you could kiss me. Like, okay, oh, glad to know that I said that. I've never been that forward in my life. So interesting that I would have chosen that ailment. Yeah. And then I'm taken down the ski, I'm taken down the ski hill, and they do a quick X ray and they go, Yeah, you're broken, like we can't fix you. And so they have to send me to a large hospital, which is about an hour away. And so they take me to the large hospital. And they see that I've broken part of my CFR and I have a severe concussion and they keep me in the hospital for about a week. And then I go home, and I can't walk because of my leg, my ankle. And I can't turn my head because of my my neck issue. And far more distressing, was I can't think I couldn't think. And one of the exercises that I was told to do that an occupational therapist or I was someone like that I had so many different therapists, physical, occupational and speech. And I can't remember exactly who told me this. But my task was to make a grilled cheese sandwich. Mind you, I am 27 almost 28 years old. I am a chemist. I know I've lived alone like a grilled cheese sandwich. Are you kidding me? Turns out, I couldn't. I couldn't make a grilled cheese sandwich. I didn't know the order to put Oh right. You got to butter the bread. And you have to put the butter side down and you have to get out the right pan and then you put the cheese on and you have to flip it and I didn't know how to make a grilled cheese sandwich. And I sat my pantry and cried. There was one time when I didn't have a walk in pantry. I just had like a large like it was a bifold door that then had three shelves on either side so you could walk I guess it's a walk But like you couldn't turn around, really. And I walked in, and I couldn't find my way out. 35:06 I didn't know how to get out of my battery that literally, like, that made no sense. Rachael Jackson 35:13 And I lost the ability to really understand math, I lost the ability to know how to play the piano. I learned Hebrew the year before, couldn't recognize a single letter after this. And to this day, language is still extremely hard for me. Now, people that know me now would have no idea that I had this. People that knew me then would go, Wow, you're really different. I have high I have extremely heightened anxiety that I never had before. Like ever. I was not an anxious person, I was a stubborn, I was shy, I was lots of other things. But I wasn't anxious. And now I have, I have quite a diagnosed generalized anxiety disorder. And so this, this Phineas Gage story really resonates with me. And I think one of the things that we as people who are with others, and this for me is where I bring in the religious piece to so many of us have religious communities, that when we're in them, we may not know why a person has changed. And it's our obligation. And I mean that word intentionally, to care for them. We don't have to be their best friends, we don't have to, to be there those ways. And if someone is abusing you, verbally abusing you, you don't have to stay in that situation. Right? Because people can get very mean, I definitely had a mean streak. While my brain was trying to figure itself out. One of my therapists called it, I had to defrag my brain. And I love that like computers. So I just defrag my brain. And then I got much better and so took about a year before before I became who I am now, but who I am now is different than who I was. So I just want to add that to our to our story. And I'm not a unique case, and I am 100% Lucky. Right? It is a it's a scary situation. And frankly, I still went to rabbinical school after that fact. So I my traumatic brain injury had a had a happy ending. Very much so. But not everyone's does. And so I think if we share our compassion and recognize this idea of myths, LM Elohim that we're all made in the image of God. And I don't believe in a God that is static. I believe in a God that is dynamic. So too, are we dynamic. So questions, reactions, etc. Kendra Holt-Moore 38:14 I think my reaction is just a fish. Again, agape facial expression. And glad that you're with us, Rachel, that's crazy, too. Zack Jackson 38:31 It reminds me of the split brain surgeries. Have you heard of these? Yes, yeah, we don't do these anymore. And so there's, there's only a small amount of research done into it. We're basically for a period of time. Some doctors were treating people with recurring seizures that were just really bad. They were treating them by severing through the corpus callosum, which is the connecting point between the two hemispheres of the brain. And it seemed to really work. Now that's, that's significant brain damage, is what that is, but it stopped the seizures and increased the quality of life. And then what they found the some of the people who had this done, started to act very strangely, in that the two halves of their bodies were not acting together anymore. Yeah. And so there were stories of like, a guy would reach into his into his closet to pick something out and his other hand would pick something else out. There was one, one guy where like, one hand was, would like hit him, while the other one had to like restrain it. There was, I think, my favorite case and this is so they're starting to see that the it seemed almost like for some people. There were two different personalities in their brain now that we're at work. Before they were working together, now they were working separately trying to control the body at the same time. But the left hemisphere of the brain is where most of your language centers are localized. And so the right hemisphere of your brain is effectively mute, and is unable to speak, but is able to have different thoughts. And but it can't speak anymore. And so there was one person who they refer to as P S. And they were able to using scrabble tiles, and moving them around with each different hand, and like blocking, putting something in between their eyes so that they can't see what the other hand is doing. And only one eye can see one and one can see the other real, confusing, convoluted thing. They asked this person who are you, and both hands spelled out, Paul. And then they asked him, What is your desired occupation and the left hand, which, which would be controlled by the right part of the brain, the more artistic impulsive side or whatever, spelled out racecar driver. And the other hand, which was controlled by the more rational one spelled out draughtsmen, which is a much more down to earth sort of occupation, right. And it was like, there were two different ambitions, two different brains, there was one that was more rational and down to earth, and there was one that was more impulsive and excited, and their ability to communicate with each other was severed, but in some ways, it gave the right brain some more freedom to interact, because now it wasn't, it could communicate now, without being overpowered by the left side of the brain. And, again, we don't do this anymore. So we only have this like, select number of patients. But it seems like maybe we are not the unified to being that we imagine ourselves to be. That even within our own brain, there is a multitude of consciousnesses that are in concert that are that are, you know, creating a sort of Mosaic personality. But that are not the same. And I think about, about in, like Rome, in Romans, the book of Romans, Paul says, I always I seem to always do what I don't want to do, and the things that I want to do, for some reason I can't do. And I am always at war with myself. And I think we can all kind of relate to this feeling of like, I have these higher ideals. And for some reason, I cannot do them. And I always seem to revert down to this other thing that I don't want to do. And like how would that conversation about our personality, our spirituality, our higher ideals or morality change, if we imagined ourselves not as, like one person being, you know, impacted from without, as much as it is multiple persons, within ourselves a multitude of people who are working in concert together to make what we feel is the best decision for our collective selves. If we start to see ourselves as a universe instead of as an individual, like, what, what kind of a difference would that make for how much grace we're willing to give ourselves or complexity we're willing to offer to others? Rachael Jackson 43:28 That's beautiful. I just finished Reading. So I'm sort of listening to what you're saying there, Zach. I just finished Reading a book called When Breath Becomes Air Are any of you familiar with Yes? So it's Paul calling our colony the colony Yeah, certainly colony, the colony, k a la a nit Hi, When Breath Becomes Air. It is a hard read. It came out just about six years ago, January of 16. A by an autobiography of a neuro surgeon who develops metastatic lung cancer, I'm not spoiling anything. He tells you that in the first chapter one of his lines that has stuck with me the whole book is like if you if you highlight in your books, and you're like oh, I just want to highlight really powerful and important passages your highlighting this whole book was he was doing a brain surgery on a person that's awake, right and that's necessary so that you know what's happening. Is that amazing that we have all these surgeries, right? We have all of these surgeries are like put me deep asleep. And these ones, they want to make sure you're awake, because they're going into your brain and they'll change and one time he's telling the story where he He's doing something, he puts some sort of thin electrode in. And the person says, I'm sad. I'm so sad. And then Paul takes it out politics electrode out, and the person goes, Oh, that's better. And so he does it again, because this is right around the area of a tumor or something like he needs to be in this area for reason. He wasn't just being like, Hey, what's this do to be in this area, Ian Binns 45:28 we should be interested. Right, just like poking it with a stick, and Rachael Jackson 45:33 he goes, and then the patient again goes, everything is just so sad. And then he pulls back a millimeter, a millimeter, I sick. I'm no longer sad, right? That's how fragile and that's, that's where we give people so much grace, a millimeter, right? Tiny little percentage, no room for air. So if you get jostled, perhaps that millimeter got shaken up. And that's why you're really sad today. And the world feels like it's really sad today. That we have this ability to give people grace. And I think that's one of the best things that we can give them, compassion or humbleness, right, that we can not even understand where they're coming from, but just understand that, that they're going through something, whatever it might be, and then we can be there for them. I don't have a I don't have a nice little bow. Kendra Holt-Moore 46:38 That story that that book though is like, it is amazing. I around the room Reading it crying by myself. Basically, Rachael Jackson 46:50 I just bought it. Yeah, if you need a cry, like almost as a cry if you need to think about death. And think about what is your purpose in life? What is the value of living and what is not to be scared about death? I'm it's just, it's an incredible book. Absolutely incredible. And then his wife wrote sort of an afterword a couple of chapters to sort of sum up like from her perspective and to finish it because he wasn't able to finish it because he died. Again, not a spoiler. Ian Binns 47:23 Yeah. Well, like the book cover said that like when I was boiling Okay. Rachael Jackson 47:35 Unlike my story, he doesn't he does not live. Zack Jackson 47:40 We are remarkably fragile creatures. Rachael Jackson 47:43 remark. Yep. So we've talked a lot about life and where that can take us and the fragility of it. So I think that that's wonderful and a good a good place to pause our conversation and if anyone has stories that they want to share with us, please feel free to do so. But I think we are at the moment where we can have our down the wormhole minute and today or this week is Kendra Kendra Holt-Moore 48:20 so I haven't decided what I want the theme music to be for the segment yet, but I might workshop a couple ideas. Right now. I want it to be something like Welcome to the segment on residents of hell. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. I mean, like some electric guitar. Zack Jackson 48:44 It will be so much better if instead of electric guitar you just did it with your mouth Kendra Holt-Moore 48:57 yeah, that's, that's kind of where I am right now. But I also want to figure out a way to blend the drone earner and earner of electric guitar with like, needy, needy like ukulele sounds. I just think those things together can really express you know, the sentiment of hell. So Well, we'll see. Yeah, so welcome to the first segment of residence, pal. I just wanted to do that again. And so today, the first Resident of hell that we're going to talk about are the hungry ghosts. And if you've never heard of the hungry ghosts, hungry ghosts, come out of the Buddhist tradition, and are particularly popular in Chinese Buddhism and are present in a few other East Asian countries where Buddhism is popular, but I think Chinese Buddhism is kind Have the main Buddhist tradition that people kind of associate with hungry ghosts and to kind of paint a picture of what a hungry ghost looks like. Because they have a very distinct presentation, they are these beings with large distended bellies, that they're always hungry. Hence, you know, it's kind of implied in the name. But they have distended bellies that are, you know, always ravenous with hunger, but they have, like long, very skinny, skinny throats. And whenever hungry, goes, try to eat food, the food, basically like turns to fire in their mouths and in their throat. So it's very painful, to try to eat food to, you know, satisfy the hunger in their large, empty stomachs. And their throats are also so skinny and small that like they can't really eat that much. And so it's they, the Hungry Ghosts, like the image of a hungry ghost is kind of like this embodiment of desire and greed. And there are a lot of different ways that you might become a hungry ghost. So that's the other thing to kind of point out is that hungry ghosts is like a possible reincarnation for, for a human, depending on your karma. So in Buddhism, there's another image that I can try to kind of paint for you, that's the Buddhist wheel of life. And there are upper realms that are more the heavenly realms, and there are lower realms, more the hellish realms, there is a distinct hell realm. And hungry ghosts actually have their own realm and they're on the visual of the Buddhist wheel of life, hungry ghosts are adjacent to the hell realm. So they're one of the lower realms and like, you don't want to be reincarnated into the Hungry Ghost Realm. But you might be reincarnated as a hungry ghost if you lived a life that was just full of greed and desire and over attachment to worldly things. Because, you know, if you're unfamiliar with Buddhism, then it's worth mentioning that in Buddhism, attachment is like a big no, no, like, you want to try to live a life in which you are not attached to, to worldly things, and you recognize that everything changes and it is marked by impermanence. And when you become attached to anything that leads to suffering. And so you're trying to kind of alleviate suffering by these practices of non attachment. So hungry ghosts are kind of a like if you become a hungry ghost, then you didn't do a very good job of being unattached. And every year during the ghost Festival, which happens in the seventh month of the lunar calendar this year, it happened like mid August, people the the lower realm the hellish realms kind of open up and hungry ghosts can roam, roam the earth here with humans and people are able to feed the hungry ghosts during the ghost festival to kind of alleviate their suffering. And so people will burn money and food like paper money and paper, food and paper kind of like luxury items to you know, appease the suffering of these beings as they wander the earth on a during the time of the ghost festival. So that is the Hungry Ghost 53:59 when I'm just hungry Zack Jackson 54:05 I can relate. Hungry Hungry Ghosts Kendra Holt-Moore 54:08 are done or not. You have just listened to the first residents of hill. Thanks for joining me didi.
Episode 93 In part 4 of our mental health miniseries, we talk about psychosis in general and schizophrenia in particular. Why does Hollywood continually misrepresent schizophrenia, and what does it actually mean to experience a psychotic break? Is it always a bad thing to hear voices or see visions? Did many of our hallowed religious heroes live with schizophrenia? If so, does that change how we should think about their words? Let's talk about it! Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:00 Hey there, Zack here. Just a heads up. In this episode we're going to be talking about psychosis, schizophrenia, hallucinations, and how we've encountered them in the media, in our religious traditions and in our own lives. As Kendra says in this episode, being a human is weird and complicated, and I want to acknowledge upfront that even though we are trying our best to be sensitive to all experiences of humanity, we will likely fall short. So if you'd like to head over to the down the wormhole conversations Facebook group, we'd love to hear about how you have experienced schizophrenia psychotic breaks hallucinations, or have interacted with those who have. Are there people in our scriptures who can help us to see these disorders in a new light? Let's talk about it. Well, let's talk about it in about an hour or so. You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are Zack Jackson UCC pastor in Redding, Pennsylvania, and if my life were a movie, I would hire Paul rent to play me. Ian Binns 01:08 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte. And if anyone could play me, I'd probably pick Ed Helms, Rachael Jackson 01:18 Rachael Jackson, Rabbi at Agoudas, Israel congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina and if I have someone play me in a movie, I'm gonna ask Sir Patrick Stewart, because he's just the best. Kendra Holt-Moore 01:33 Kendra Holt-Moore, assistant professor of religion at Bethany college and Lindsborg Kansas, and if I had to get someone to play me in a movie, it would be Kathryn Hahn. I'm trying to remember who that is. She plays Jen Barkley in parks and rec She most recently what I saw her she's a witch Agatha. Oh, yeah, Vision Agassi's it was Zack Jackson 02:01 also a young a young Laura Dern. I think what would be great as Kendra Kendra Holt-Moore 02:07 Oh, yeah, people have said that to me, too. Yes. Young, large earner like Lauren's daughter something. Adam Pryor 02:14 Prior, I work at Bethany College in Lindsborg Kansas. If someone were to play me in a movie. I think it would be Statler of Statler and Waldorf. Zack Jackson 02:25 Having a muppet play You bet. Rachael Jackson 02:29 That's perfect. Actually. Kendra Holt-Moore 02:36 Oh, sorry. I don't really know who the specific Muppets are. I know who the Muppets are, but I don't know Adam Pryor 02:43 that there is one Kendra Holt-Moore 02:46 who heckles besides like Miss Peggy? Yeah, no. Adam Pryor 02:49 Guys who hackles Zack Jackson 02:51 Statler and Waldorf. Yeah, Ian Binns 02:53 yeah, I can see that. I could definitely see that. Yeah, that's totally you, Adam. Kendra Holt-Moore 03:00 Yeah, so today, we're continuing in our series on mental health and we are talking about psychosis today. Pardon? So, we're talking about psychosis, but we're actually talking like more specifically about schizophrenia. And, and so, psychosis, like more generally speaking, is there a lot of different ways for someone to experience a psychotic break, have a an episode of psychosis, and that can look a lot of different ways. But it it like the main, the primary characteristic of psychosis is like a major break from reality. And so it is, you know, understandably, very disturbing, and very destabilizing of the individual who experiences psychosis and psychosis. Different disorders of psychosis are are often like, not very well miss. Not very well understood. And, and so that makes them both kind of, like frustrating and also intriguing to clinicians and like to the popular imagination, there's just like something about, you know, psychotic disorders that are, you know, the way that they get represented in, in film, and in TV. They are usually portrayed to be, you know, a little a little scary, like, not scary from the inside of like the person who has experienced a psychotic break because obviously, that's frightening, but also frightening to people on the outside watching what's happening. because it's hard to understand or like, connect with someone who has a break from reality and in how do you how do you care for a person or include a person who is just seemingly in like a totally different dimension of time and space in a lot of ways, then then what you are experiencing in your more like grounded reality. So that's generally like, what psychosis is. But to talk more specifically about schizophrenia. Schizophrenia is, again, like we, we understand more about it, like we're learning more and more. But it's, there's still a lot that we don't know. For example, we don't, we don't really understand, like, what causes schizophrenia. And we can make some observations about schizophrenia. Such as, like, if you have someone in your family with schizophrenia, like if you have a parent who has schizophrenia, you have a higher risk for developing it. But that's not necessarily indicative of it. Like it's not, it's not a fact that you will have schizophrenia at some point in time. And we, we know, you know, we've observed that schizophrenia tends to happen, roughly equally, between women and men. We, you know, we know that like, kind of stereotypes of schizophrenics are that they're dangerous and violent. But, you know, we have observed that that's actually not true. Short, like, anyone can can be violent or aggressive. But that is not, that's not a general or fair characteristic of schizophrenic people. And schizophrenia, there's also different types. So like, I guess I should, you know, maybe say, like, what exactly this is, because, you know, we have, again, I think people probably have associations of, of what it is from, like media representations, but it's a brain disorder, again, not entirely sure, like what's going on in the brain, but a brain disorder that can create a lot of really disturbing symptoms, such as hallucinations, which can be visual hallucinations, or auditory, like sound hallucinations. And it can make people delusional. And so you know, believing in something very adamantly, that is just not true. So, you know, some delusions might might look something like, like, someone who's delusional might think that they are like a savior of some kind, and they have to, like, save the world. And they might think that, like, the FBI is sending the messages that are about information that only they would know, because they are destined to, like, save the universe. Like, really, you know, some of these delusions can be very grand, delusional thinking. And other symptoms could be like trouble just thinking concentrating or communicating. There are a lot of, you know, especially people who work with schizophrenics, in a clinical capacity will tell stories about, you know, speaking to someone who's schizophrenic who has symptoms that disturb communication, they might just like string a bunch of words together, but those words don't actually make any sense whatsoever. Like, there's not a comprehensible sentence there. But something is happening in in the in the brain, like the communication pathways where whatever that person may or may not want to say, it just doesn't come out. And likewise, someone who's schizophrenic, who is listening to another person talk, they may hear different words than the words that are actually coming out of that person's mouth. And so that's another again, just like disturbance, that is a break with reality that they don't have control over and is it's it just makes it very difficult to navigate, like what should otherwise be pretty mundane, normal experiences for people. Other Other symptoms are just like a General, General flat effect, or, you know, a lack of expression, a sluggishness that just, you know, is is pretty severe. And so there are like, there, as you can see, there's like this constellation of symptoms that can appear. And, you know, usually people will have like more than one of these symptoms. But the ones that are especially disturbing are typically the ones that are the hallucination or delusional thinking type of symptoms, and hallucinations, you know, whether they're visual or auditory. Those are hard, obviously, because it's, it's, it's difficult to distinguish what is real and what is not real. And so those are, especially, you know, a lot of researchers are intrigued, by the way that people who are schizophrenic sort of interpret their hallucinations. And it's just kind of this really distinct, like qualitatively different kind of symptom then the like, flat effect, which is still troubling and disturbing in its own way. But so there's just something to note there about like, these, this constellation of symptoms that schizophrenics Can, can experience collectively, like, why this is disturbing. Like, it's clear why that's disturbing the break from reality. But what we're talking about mostly today are hallucinations. And, and, you know, maybe some delusions too, but especially auditory hallucinations in the sound of hearing voices. And so to say something just about, like hearing voices, that can, that can happen in a couple of ways. So, for example, you may hear a voice, maybe one person is saying something, but in like your schizophrenic mindset, you may hear that voice sounds like it's coming from multiple people, like there's kind of a lesion of something talking at you, but maybe you're having a conversation with one person. I mentioned already that, you know, another example is hearing words that are not actually coming out of the person's mouth, and they're saying something totally different. Another, another way of hearing voices is just noises in the environment that kind of morph into what sound like voices. And so that can lead to a lot of experiences of whispering and, you know, kind of chatter in the distance that can't quite make out what the voices are. But it sounds like voices. And so I there's, you know, an example of like a car sort of washing by down the street in the sound of the car wishing by that kind of like car wash transforms into a what sounds like a voice. So voices, wherever, whatever stimuli in the environment, or like in that person's head, that's creating the voice. You know, it may or may not be clear, like, there are ways that schizophrenic people learn to manage those symptoms. And, you know, I think my understanding is that some people can identify like, certain things as being real or not real, but sometimes it's hard, especially, I would imagine, if you were like just discovering that you are schizophrenic. It, there's no, there's no complete cure for schizophrenia, you can manage symptoms with anti psychotic medication, but it's, it's, it's disturbing. So this is, this is this kind of brain disorder is, again, it, there's something that's just, it's so severe, and it's transformation of a person's everyday experience that a lot of researchers and people have this interest in this the intersection between something like schizophrenia, and a person's, like, experiences of religion and spirituality. And that's not always relevant for like particular people. But, but it is something that comes up and there is there are a lot of, you know, social scientists, especially like psychologist anthropologists, and, you know, other other clinicians who are like asking these kinds of questions about like, what, what this intersection could be, and, and to say, Oh, one more thing, also that, like schizophrenia sometimes is mistaken for like multiple personality disorder, which is also known, I think, maybe more accurate accurately now as dissociative dissociative identity disorder. So, you know, those They're also like, their own kind of like disturbing, you know, experience of the world break from reality. But that's their distinct from schizophrenia, what we're talking about. So what is the intersection between something like schizophrenia, psychosis with religious or spiritual experiences? So, there? For one, there's a lot of people who asked this really interesting question about the history of shamanism, and people in in various cultures. Just just just code, like what we would call diseases or disorders, it's important to realize that, you know, that the the way that people experience not just schizophrenia, but a number of different conditions, there, there's a cultural element in the way we like code, others and our own experiences with these disorders and diseases and schizophrenia is no different. So, in in, in Western countries, like in the United States, in particular, it is a lot more common for people to experience schizophrenia in themselves as like madness, their people are much more willing and immediate in their response to say, like, this is bad, these voices that I'm hearing, if they have auditory hallucinations, they are disturbing me, they are frightening me, they are torturing me. And there's a generally speaking, a negative experience with auditory hallucinations. And, and people also typically, you know, just the, the way that we talk about something like schizophrenia, people are more likely to use the term schizophrenia as like a category like a word that describes this collection of symptoms that we see as disordered. And they're, you know, the solution is antis, psychotic medications are like being put in a mental mental institution, and, you know, various other clinical ways of managing something like schizophrenia. And so, people in the US, when, when researchers have like interviewed people, with schizophrenia, there's this language around it, that's much there's just much more negative experiences with voices. And, and, and what people find in other countries and other like cultural settings, is, it's not that people don't ever talk about schizophrenia, or that they don't ever feel afraid of their hallucinations. But, um, there's something pretty distinct about the contexts of other other cultures from the US context in which there's more flexibility in how other cultures sort of manage something like schizophrenia. And so there's an example of a group of researchers who kind of compared three different groups of schizophrenics in, in the US, in India and in Ghana. And what they found was, the US kind of fit that characteristic of people describing a negative relationship with their hallucinations. But when they looked at the, the samples in Ghana, and in India, they found that people were much more likely to describe the voices they were hearing as providing guidance. And sometimes people would say, you know, some like in India, there were a couple of people who had hallucinations of like, a particular Hindu God, or, you know, maybe have like a family member or like a famous person they'd read about in a magazine, like different manifestations of visual and auditory hallucinations, that they instead of, you know, it may be more frightening at first, but over time, they started to almost rely on them, like these voices actually helped me understand and remind me what I should do to be a good person. And in other instances, you know, they're, like, in the, in the India in Ghana samples in particular, people might feel like a kinship with those voices, that maybe there's like family members appearing in those hallucinations that are, again giving guidance and providing a sense of I mean, I don't know if like comfort is the right word here, but there was less fear and Like revulsion at those voices, and there was a place kind of created in the mind of these people. And so, you know, they, they realize that what they're experiencing was unusual compared to others, but there was still a coating of those experiences as something that was either instructive or, or supernatural. Definitely a relationship between voices, and supernatural deities or, or demons, that's not uncommon. And you know, that, again, it's not that people in the US, like, would never code their experiences as supernatural or demonic are from God in some way. But this was, the seemed to be a little more acceptable and common in, in the samples from India and Ghana. And, and so this is just an interesting, like, comparison, and I think is relevant to this broader question that other researchers are looking into, like, is shamanism is there a connection between shamanism and something like psychotic conditions like schizophrenia, where you learn how to manage voices and, and symptoms that you're experiencing that are different from everyone else, and instead of being in a mental institution, you are now sort of elevated into a, into this particular role in a society where you can still interact and function in a community by sharing what you have that no one else has. And it's a way there's, you know, it's a, it's, it's a way of thinking about something like schizophrenia, that's, that kind of normalizes it, or like, maybe not normalizes it, but it provides a place. So that's a person doesn't need to necessarily be like, isolated or feel like they are like, totally insane. And it's just really different and interesting that this is like, this is the interesting link between something like schizophrenia, these like psychotic disorders, and, you know, religious or spiritual interpretations of those disorders to be sort of functional for a community. And so that's, that's the, that's what I, you know, just when, when introduced here, so, like, how does that how does that land for any of any of y'all, and what do you? What other thoughts do you have? Like, what do you have any experience? Do you know, anyone with schizophrenia? Like, what do you what do you think? Rachael Jackson 22:58 Yeah, so thank you for Kendra Holt-Moore 23:00 sorry, no, Rachael Jackson 23:03 you're good. You're good. Oh, good. Thank you for giving us this perspective. And I really like the interdisciplinary overview. I obviously am in the culture of America. So those that I know that have schizophrenia have definitely experienced it in that aggressive and fear based place. And it was lovely to read about these places in India, I was really fond of the one from India, where they were saying that this is really, I interpreted it as protective, and guiding, very almost nurturing and parental, which is very different than people that I that I know, with schizophrenia here, that it's very fear based. And it's, it's daunting, it's not just the break from reality, that's scary, which I think would be across cultures. But it's the how they're experiencing the the auditory. I'm not gonna say just voices, but the auditory sounds right. Well, that's redundant. What they are experiencing from sound is scary. And we don't we tend to our society tends to, to shun that to shun the differences. Our society tends to think that if you if you have this break, you're broken. And that was something that that has really stuck with me and trying to figure out how to encourage people to to acknowledge that they're not broken, um, has been something that we as a as a society and culture can fix, I think, even if the disease itself you know, we can't Zack Jackson 25:01 So, my my first experience with this, even with schizophrenia at all, came from the movie, beautiful mind about the mathematician John Nash, played by Russell Crowe, who has a roommate that he lives with that assumes that everyone knows this roommate for years until he discovers that this is not a real person. And he's in his mind, and there's this whole world, and then they discovers he's got all these conspiracy theories. And it's, it becomes this sort of thriller. And that is how I imagined schizophrenia to be that there are people out there who just imagine that there are people with them at all times, and how terrifying that was. And they kind of, there was a, I think there's a scene in there where he does hurt someone. And it's kind of like, this guy is a danger. But I more, just lived for years terrified that this was actually happening to me. And that the people that I knew, like, I would be like, is this person real? Or am I imagining them? Am I having a psychotic break? Or is this person real? Can you see this person, and it made me really paranoid. And now that I'm, I'm a bit older, and I realized that that's not actually how it works. And that's just how it works in Hollywood. And that it's more like, a lot of these voices are internal. And people kind of understand that. I, I've seen it everywhere. In in my religious world, we tend to attract people who hear voices. And I get that all the time. Now. It's like, I heard a voice from God saying this. And it's usually something about how this person is uniquely qualified to save something or do something really important or dramatic. And then that is left up to me to decide if that is the voice of God or the voice of a psychosis or both, or neither. And I feel woefully unqualified to do that. And for the most part, Rachael Jackson 27:14 I would second I would second that you are woefully unqualified. Zack Jackson 27:19 Thanks, Rachel. Rachael Jackson 27:20 You're welcome. You're welcome. I think I think clergy are often the first people to to recognize that there could be something amiss, and that's our job. And then to pass it along to the people that can go Oh, no, you're just having a faith experience? Or, oh, wow, you're really having a psychotic break. Right? And that we're the first persons to acknowledge that, yes, you can hear these voices. And sometimes it's a natural faith thing. And sometimes it's a natural brain disorder thing. But just just just just reaffirming that you are willfully unqualified as am I, as our most clergy. Sorry. No offense. Yeah. Kendra Holt-Moore 28:05 I think that's a good point, though, about an in Yeah, it makes sense that clergy are in many cases, like the the first people to encounter people in which it's hard to tell what's happening, because there's some there's the shared language of people who are experiencing hallucinations, whether they're like, specifically schizophrenic or, or something else, saying, like, God said this to me, and how to distinguish that from other people who, you know, it might be unclear if they have something going on in terms of a brain disorder, but that's also just like common parlance to talk about, like, Faith experiences, or, you know, like, there's, there's a whole book actually one of the researchers who have participated in interviews with schizophrenic people. She also wrote a book about evangelical faith and the language of like, talking to God. And so that, you know, just like the recognition that there's shared language there, and you know, typically, I think it's, it's straightforward to tell when, like, what the difference is, but not always. And I think that Rachel and Decker, you know, right, that it's clergy who have to kind of make that first call sometimes. Zack Jackson 29:35 Well, so here's an example. There's an elder at the church, who one day showed up to a worship service, stark naked, and ran around the parking lot, yelling about how this church had become corrupt, and how the pastor was in in league with the devil and was and with that Elder board was siphoning money. And we used to run around every day, every Sunday morning, when people showed up would show up naked streak through the parking lot and yell about how this church was going to hell did it for three years. Okay, so that didn't actually happen. But it happened in Isaiah chapter 20. And when Isaiah does it in Isaiah chapter 20, it's like wow, with this prophetic image, that God told him to remove thy sackcloth, and thy shoes and to even expose the buttocks for under three years to shame the Egyptians, as he went through the towns, prophesying to the people. And that sounds holy and righteous. But if somebody did that now, we'd be like, This man has a psychotic break, and he needs to be hospitalized. And should we have hospitalized? Isaiah? Yes. Yeah. Rachael Jackson 30:58 Yes, no, I am. I'm being totally serious. I mean, I think that the hospitalization of people that have mental disorders or challenges, we need to fix that system. But the concept that Isaiah probably had some sort of mental illness, absolutely, I think our the Hebrew Bible at least I can't really speak to the Christian bible as thoroughly, really examples of the human conditions. And Isaiah is one of those that examples, schizophrenia. I just like when we talked about depression, and we can see it and anxiety like, I believe that the Hebrew Bible absolutely gives us reference to most of the brain diseases that we are uncomfortable with to this day. So yes, I think he should have been, but somehow positively. So then, Zack Jackson 31:57 is Isaiah hearing the voice of God, or the voice of Isaiah? And if by hospitalizing him and treating his condition? Are we then stopping prophecy? Kendra Holt-Moore 32:13 asking those tough questions, Zack Jackson 32:15 that's what we're here for. Rachael Jackson 32:16 Right? I think it's who's listening? Right? I think that if a person like Isaiah, minus the modesty issues, because let's remember that they had a very different understanding of being closed or not closed than we do in our semi Puritan American culture. You know, barring that piece, if someone's listening, and it makes sense, then yeah, that that person can still be a prophet. And whether or not that is the voice of God that Isaiah is hearing, in actuality, or the presumption of Isaiah that it is the voice of God, who Isaiah is speaking to his hearing as a as a prophet. And they're the ones that are listening or not listening. And I think we can absolutely have people that are prophetic nowadays. And it's really the difference of, you know, where is it God? Or is it an understanding of God? And does that even matter? So, yeah, I, I think, yes. It's that we have gone deaf, to people that are trying to show us show us things about our society that we don't want to. Kendra Holt-Moore 33:31 I was gonna echo something similar that you said, Rachel was like, the question of a god or as an internal voice, that, yeah, like, does that matter? For one, the person who is hearing the voice, but also does that matter for people who are listening to the person, and for some people, that will matter, and for some people that won't. And so I think, with like, the authority of the or the origin of the voice, may affect the like, interpretation of the importance of what is being said. And that just kind of, kind of depends what's happening. I think, as to whether it's, you know, whether one, it depends on the context, in the content of what is being said as to whether I, for example, would think that person needs to be institutionalized. Or, you know, if I would maybe be likely to call them something like a prophet or a guide of in like a cultural moment. I think they're, it's just like the kinds of voices people hear or claim to hear are so varied. think there are absolutely some voices that I do not want to listen to and that I do not want you to have to listen to You know? So it's like, are you telling me to like, go jump off a bridge? Or are you telling me that like, society is corrupt? Because those are both examples of things that people can hear when they're hearing voices and claiming that it's coming from God or, you know, the devil or whatever. But, you know, it's, it has the interpretation of what to do with that information is contingent upon the community, cultural norms, a bunch of things. And so it makes it very tricky to kind of, I think, generalized about like, how to respond to those voices from the outside. And also like recognizing, I watched a, an interview one time with a person who's schizophrenic, and the interviewer was asking her questions, and started asking her questions about, like, the hallucinations, and she had visual hallucinations. And so the interviewer started to say, like, do you see the hallucinations right now? And where are they in the room? And she said, I'm actually not going to answer those questions, because I don't like to tell people where the hallucinations are in the room. Because when real people start interacting with my hallucinations, it makes it difficult for me to tell what is real and not real. Found. And so I thought that was really, really interesting to just like from, from that, like, another perspective of how to deal with what is happening. Ian Binns 36:42 Yeah, so, you know, to echo what Zack said, the beginning, one of my first experiences with schizophrenia was the movie, A Beautiful Mind. And, you know, I'd loved that movie. And I, as we were kindred, as you're talking, I'd looked it up and was, I did not realize that when the movie came out that it was actually celebrated by some in the mental health community that had a somewhat accurate portrayal of schizophrenia, not that they didn't take liberties, but that it actually did somewhat of a decent job. But I also remember when that movie came out, it was a time when I was struggling with medication for my depression. And when I saw that movie, and saw that the, you know, John Nash, according to the movie, was able to overcome some of his, you know, issues with schizophrenia, by sheer will, that I remember thinking to myself, Well, if that's possible, why couldn't I and so I remember actually having those conversations with my counselor at the time, and she was saying that, even though the movie did a somewhat decent job, that there was a lot of pushback on that part of the film. And that's what the thing I read too, was that that's not accurate at all. Like it, that's not how it works. And so, so that was one thing. But the other thing too, when we're talking about voices, it just kept making me think about, like, who is it that determines that whatever voice someone's listening to is, right or wrong, right? Like, do you know what I mean? Like, how is it that that's determined that okay, this, this person clearly has a mental health disease, they need to be hospitalized versus not? So because if you know, there are a lot of people who say that I, that they speak to God. Right, but they're not coming back. Right, but then also to if they say that they believe this, that God is speaking to them. Is that an example of schizophrenia or not? Rachael Jackson 38:50 So, if I may jump in here. I'm one of the I'm going to give a quick anecdote. There's a person that I knew that was taking a psychological test. And part of the psychological test was on a on a form, like on an actual piece of paper, this was before before computers, so on an actual piece of paper. And this person was smart enough to fool the test, and gave all of the answers to indicate that this person had a psychotic schizophrenia. And then the people that were evaluating this test, looked at it and went, Well, it's true. You showed us this, your paper is pristine. There were no erasers there were no, it didn't get torn up. The paper itself was perfectly fine. So this person was able to trick the system. But the challenge is it's not just a checkbox. So when we're talking about people that have hallucinations visual or auditory? I see things I can imagine something or someone sitting right here in my office, I can see them in my mind's eye right here. Right, I can vision. Am I hallucinating that am I hearing that one of the things that I think is challenging that we forget, his people that have not had this break in reality is in conversation with a person that is either currently going through or has had or is off medication, or whatever the situation might be. The flow of conversation is not the way that we understand it. So when I read Isaiah, or I read some of these other people that go, Hmm, there's something amiss here, they're still understandable of people that I have interacted with which at this point, you know, given that I'm a small town clergy, you know, I were numbering a couple of dozen people that I've I've interacted with that have this particular diagnosis, you cannot follow their thoughts. It is a thought here a thought there it is all over the board. And they think that they are making perfect sense. And that's the break, where there's a major disconnect, not just in the delusions of grandeur, like I, one of the articles that will link in, in today's show notes, has this idea of John hood, I believe his last name was who's who's talking about this, and then he thinks that he's a shaman. And he then he thinks that he's going to that he's married to two African princesses, and he's going to go live with them. And it's one sentence to another sentence. And the listener has no ability to follow these trains of thought. And we forget that. So A Beautiful Mind doesn't necessarily example that the other movie the soloist about I think his name was Nathaniel Ayers, a white ers, that has a little bit better understanding of the challenges of from the the person who is who's has this illness, about them what they really go through. So I just want to add that, but yes, we hear God and if someone says, oh, you know, God talked to me, but God made perfect sense to the listener. And they're saying, here's what God told me to do. And how was, you know, have a great day. And I hope you have, and it's cohesive. I think these are clues. So Kendra Holt-Moore 42:43 I just want to follow up on what Rachel said also, that just real quick that, like hallucinations, it that like having a hallucination is not an automatic indicator that like you're schizophrenic, that some of the other like conditions in which you might have hallucinations, or things like Parkinson's disease, which I didn't realize, like hallucinations were part of that until recently, brain tumors, you know, sometimes like Alzheimer's, like there are different, like epilepsy stuff, stuff, stuff happens in the brain. And so there's other other like, you know, we talked in the beginning about the constellation of symptoms. And so that's just like, something to keep in mind too. Adam Pryor 43:26 But I was gonna say, it seems like that idea of an integrated epistemic frame is really important, right? So like, if the pieces are integrated into a singular or cohesive worldview, then you have one sort of set of things. It's this moment where they no longer can be held together, but they have to be attended to simultaneously that that's this, like this break that occurs. So I can talk to God, but if it but if it integrates with the way in which that I experienced the world, you know, totally good. Zack Jackson 44:16 So then religion offers that sort of scaffolding for these sorts of experiences, then on break pretty regularly. I'm thinking of like Joan of Arc, if she were in a different sort of situation. Would her her visions her voices have said different things if she were in South India instead of in France? Or is God speaking directly to Joan of Arc? And we are trying to diagnose the work of the Holy Spirit and trying to medicate away modern day prophecy and the presence of a living and terrifying and powerful God. Adam Pryor 44:59 Like that Academy at all. Zack Jackson 45:01 I know you don't you don't love dichotomies at all. Adam Pryor 45:07 It feels like if I asked this feels like a full trichotomy, Zack Jackson 45:10 this is. So this is the the tension that goes on inside of my head. Because I was, in my developmental years, I was told that, that a lot of these anti psychotic medications are there to suppress actual experiences with the supernatural, because there are some people in the world who are more sensitive to the presence of the supernatural, both good and evil. And the anti psychotics then suppress those natural abilities. Think like the first half of Captain Marvel, right? That that kind of limiting factor because we can't handle the spiritual world and the modern, modern world, because we have to be able to explain it, and domesticate it, and understand it in order to, for it to exist. And so that I still have that in there. And and now I think I'm thinking more about like, positive mental health, and how would you like to live? And we're understanding more about how the brain works. And we don't quite understand how this works. And I want to just have space open for that as a possibility. But I don't quite know what to do with it. Adam Pryor 46:30 Don't don't want that space open. Oh, but Zack Jackson 46:33 Adam, so many of our religious traditions are based on Revelation are based on divine revelations, in stories and in histories that have been passed down to us. If those divine revelations happened today, we would label them as psychotic breaks. I mean, if you just started talking to a bush, don't you think that we would say you're having a psychotic break? Adam Pryor 46:57 No, they'd say, I'm walking around campus, but Ian Binns 46:59 like, fight moment Adam Pryor 47:03 point out, right. It's not actually the scientific side of this that bothers me. Right? It's actually the theological side where I want to go that bad theology, it is a bad understanding of the supernatural. Zack Jackson 47:16 Okay, hit me with it. Ian Binns 47:18 So yeah, you got to unravel that one. Adam Pryor 47:20 I would argue that all revelation is contextual, insofar as it is a mode of communication. So it is, of course, going to change depending on where and when and how that revelation occurs, because the supernatural isn't something separate from the natural, as if it is in other realm that has its own structure of things from which it originates. It is something layered over the natural, you know, what super natural actually means on top of the natural. So it's just a deficient theological understanding as far as I'm concerned. Zack Jackson 48:00 So there's, Kendra Holt-Moore 48:02 it's I think that like Adams talking about a naturalist interpretation of Revelation, and Zach is talking about a supernatural right, but in Adam Pryor 48:10 his supernatural, this version is bad. It's a bad understanding of supernatural. Kendra Holt-Moore 48:15 Oh, I mean, I, I'm with Adam here, but just to like, describe what the different. Zack Jackson 48:22 So there's two different types of revelation that we often talk about natural revelation, special revelation, natural revelation being the things that you can deduce on your own from the laws of the universe, in your experience of being a human on this planet. special revelation are those times that God speaks to a person and tells them a specific thing, right? Like, go set my set my people free, like that's, that's a special revelation. Jesus coming and and saying, Hey, God told me this thing. And I want you to know it. That's special revelation. And I'm talking about the special revelation, not the natural. Yeah, I'm still Adam Pryor 49:03 on board. But special education is still contextually located. Absolutely, period. So it's gonna change no matter where it is that it's spoken to. It's only if you treat special revelation as though the supernatural othering world from which it comes, is so overwhelming, that it completely mutes the expectation of the receptive hearer, in such a way that that context no longer matters, that it creates a break with the actual place in which it is received and I want to go, that's not communication anymore. That's not even revelation anymore. Right, insofar as revealing is supposed to be a form of communicating. So, to my mind, like there's no sort of like articulation from a theological tradition that can defend that notion of special revelation on its own terms. Zack Jackson 49:59 So, Paul, On his donkey horse, I don't remember his going to go do some some good old fashioned persecuting, and gets a blinding light falls off his horse, or donkey or whatever it was, and sees a vision of Jesus standing before him that says, Adam Pryor 50:16 Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? That's what Paul told us. Right? But actually, that's his failure that all he saw was a blinding light. There's no God, and he's not actually an apostle. So shouldn't we just throw stuff out? I mean, Zack Jackson 50:32 should we ever go in there today, Adam? I'm just talking about Paul, in Paul's words, Paul, in Paul's words, Kendra Holt-Moore 50:39 great episode, I'm so glad that you had Zack Jackson 50:41 a vision, he had a light, he saw light, he fell off his his quadruped head and hit his head. And then he couldn't see for a while until he was healed by this guy, this fella. And then he could see again, and he had this special revelation that feels a lot like he had a seizure. It fits a lot of the categories of that. And so when you explain it like that, like naturally, then you might just say, Wow, he had this break, he had this, this seizure, he maybe had some epileptic stroke. And he then attributed it to, I must have been doing something wrong when it happened, because God was punishing me. And then after the fact, put in his theology, and that's what's happening. Adam Pryor 51:30 Kinder, you raising your hand? Kendra Holt-Moore 51:33 Yes. I just wanted to jump in and say, Zack, you you've said a couple times, like, what I think like referring to the, what Adam called the dichotomy here between like, is a revelation or psychotic break. I don't think that calling like, I don't think that rejecting revelation leads immediately to describing something like the examples that you're giving as psychotic breaks, I think, like another way of, of naming that without going straight to like, psychotic mental disorder, would be to say, like, I think the way I would describe that, coming from, like, a more like social science II type framework would, would be to say, there's selective attention. Like, whenever you experience different kinds of, like auditory visual stimuli, especially in cases where there's like a religious or spiritual experience going on, there's selective attention happening where people, you know, the selective attention you give to light to sound to images, it affects the way that you code and remember those experiences, which sometimes are things like, you know, prophetic visions, or, like, whatever it is, it's not. And I think that this is, like, I think this is getting at some of like, what your concern is, is that it like, and I understand the concern also being about like reductionism, I think of, of like, spiritual and religious experiences. But I think that selective attention to our just daily experiences is just something that everyone does. But especially in, you know, these cases where it's like, extraordinary circumstances or experiences of certain kinds of stimuli. Our like, we each have selective attention that is informed by cultural, you know, biases and cognitive biases, you know, the way that we understand kinship, family, friends, spirits, minds, all of those, you know, cultural pieces affect the way that we attend to our experiences and, and that's not necessarily good or bad. It's just a fact of like being human and so that that's like a third option I want to throw in there as like, maybe revelation, maybe psychotic break, maybe selective attention, and all of those things, all three of those options can have meaning. And so I think, yeah, like, meaning is not mutually exclusive to any of these. Yeah, Zack Jackson 54:35 yeah. In the, in the fear of reductionism, I think is where the, my soul wants to push back. Because if I am going to accept that an angel appeared to marry and told her something very specific, but then immediately dismiss that an angel showed up to John Smith in my congregation because of all he says a lot of training things that I need to second either second guess how I'm treating him today? Or how I am Reading my own religious tradition? And I think I need to be honest with that. I can't have it both ways. Adam Pryor 55:13 Yeah, this this is where I think reductionism becomes a boogeyman, though. Like, it doesn't have to do the things that in some theological and religious circles people say it will do. Kendra Holt-Moore 55:27 I mean, that's what I'm, I'm on board with that I like, reductionism is is the name of the Boogeyman. But the boogeyman is not really looking man Adam Pryor 55:38 is just a nation sack. Zack Jackson 55:40 Oh, man, you academics trying to trying to dismantle the argument instead of instead of coming straight at it? Ian Binns 55:52 I'm just enjoying listening. So no, I really wish I had popcorn in this conversation. Kendra Holt-Moore 55:59 No, but like reductionism. It is, I think, the primary concern that people have when when we talk about this, like religion and science intersection, and people who don't, who aren't coming at these conversations out of an academic context, like, like, it makes sense to me why that's a concern. But I like Adam, I I don't think that that. I think that the fear that people have about reductionism, my experience of that was only like an initial fear. And then, like, over time, a realization for me that, like, I just, I still Yes, I've like changed over time, in some significant ways. But I still think that there's a lot of meaning in experiences. And just because we like understand the way that the brain works, or, you know, like, the way the body works, I don't think that that means we can't also have this like layer of experience in human life, that is profound. And not just meaningful, but also really profound and spiritual. And, you know, all the other ways that we talk about those kinds of experiences. It's just also true that it probably like the way that I interpret that situation, that experience is going to be different than, you know, the way someone else interprets it in their own framework. But I'm comfortable with that. And I realized that that just inherently will make some people uncomfortable, the difference in our like, understanding of, I guess, like the ontological nature of those experiences. So yeah, I don't know. Zack Jackson 57:50 Yeah, I think there's a, I'm there with you. I'm there with you, intellectually, I either I don't disagree with anything, I'll say that. I think my where I'm coming from as a kind of practical place in which I am on the regular in contact with people who have visions, and who have experiences and who are asking me to help interpret the Word of God that has come to them in a vision or in a moment of rapture, or in this data, the other. And I think, Paul says that we should discern every spirit that comes. And, you know, it's not so easy to tell if this is the spirit of light or of darkness. But that every vision, whether it comes from while you're Reading some textbook, or having some ecstatic moment of otherness, and experience, that all of those visions need to be tested against what your community holds as true, and what is good for human flourishing. And so I'm, I feel the fear of people, when, when I suggest I'm having this experience, actually right now, not like in this moment, I'm not having an experience. I'm, I'm with somebody now, who is having some a lot of these kinds of experiences. And she is extremely frustrated at every other pastor that she's talked to, because they all say, Wow, it sounds like you're having some mental distress. Have you seen a therapist? Are you on your medication, instead of meeting her in that space in that common parlance of like, Yeah, okay. I might personally think that she is having a psychotic break, but I need to communicate with her in this realm of of the spirits, as both as a common language so that we can actually get somewhere productive and also as a way of kind of intellectual honesty that I don't entirely understand the workings of the supernatural and the natural and ease I don't understand how magnets work. So I don't I don't know, maybe you are experiencing something that I'm I don't know. So I try to stay intellectually, spiritually humble in those situations. I mean, I do understand intellectually how magnets work, but I don't know how they work. Kendra, do you have any final thoughts first, as we wrap up? Kendra Holt-Moore 1:00:26 Well, I just wanted to say in the sharing of intellectual honesty, I, I just I want to say that, like, my academic explanation of like, someone saying, God told them to do whatever it is, like I can talk about, like, selective attention and all of that. But if I'm talking about like, oh, energy healing, yeah, that I sure, um, oh, no selective attention. That's just that's just real. I like it. That's not to say that. Like, it's a different category of experience. Of course, like, you know, that. I don't even know that some people would feel comfortable, like comparing those two things. But just to say that it's not. People are complicated and have different kinds of experiences that they understand in different ways. And it's not that people who I don't I don't think it's fair to say that people who, who use academic jargon and and do maybe, like lean on, like reductionistic ways of thinking, which I actually I do not group, me and Adam into that category. Maybe y'all group us into that category. But I think that those people always have something that they don't talk about that's like personal and that is, it is like the bottom level foundation of like, their what, what is real for them? And it's just also like a SEP, like a separation issue of like, the academic and the personal when you're in like different settings. And I imagine that feels really different when you're like a clergy person. So yeah, people are weird, you know, people are weird. That's my final word. Rachael Jackson 1:02:17 People are weird. People are weird. That's today's title. Oh, but Adam, Adam has Kendra Holt-Moore 1:02:23 a big, Zack Jackson 1:02:24 yeah, tagline Adam Pryor 1:02:26 got a bit. I'm super excited about it, share it with, Zack Jackson 1:02:29 you have a jingle. Adam Pryor 1:02:30 We're working on that. So until then, I've decided to title my bit under the apple tree. In deference to the apocryphal phrase from one of the persons of my tradition, Martin Luther, who was said to have said, Even if I knew that tomorrow, the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. I mean, in all likelihood, he didn't actually say this, the earliest you can trace it back as about 1944. It's by a phrase from the Confessing Church, trying to ensure that it continued to do things in resistance to Nazi dictatorship. But you know, it feels better when it comes from the person who's ostensibly the founder of your tradition. And this gets interpreted a lot of ways. But generally, what you know, the sentiment was, was that even if things look like they're going to go terribly, if the world might end, you move one step at a time, so I thought, what better way to end podcasts than to rehearse the ways the world might end? So for today, Ian Binns 1:03:32 tapping into your superpower. Adam Pryor 1:03:38 I decided, well, it's one let's be clear, there are a whole lot of people writing about the ways this would occur. So I had a lot to choose from, but I decided I would go with supervolcanoes today. And the idea is that, you know, because we don't actually live on a nice, stable planet. In fact, we live on, like, rafts of rock floating over molten lava all of the time. At various points in the history of the planet. Those ruptures occur such that molten rock flows all over the surface of the planet, and four of the largest last 11 extinction events are all tied to when volcanoes erupt at the same time. Usually, it eliminates somewhere between 95 and 98% of species on the planet. Wow, on average, that happens every you know, 17 to 30,000 years, and it's been over 36,000 years since the last one. So we're overdue. overdue. So that should be occurring anytime now. And essentially what will happen is there will be so much carbon dioxide spewed into the atmosphere that it'll create a runaway greenhouse effect. And you can expect that all Plants will die, including plankton in the waters. And that spells real trouble for the rest of us. So, if you see volcanoes going off in chain sequences around the world, plant your apple tree, Kendra Holt-Moore 1:05:19 don't bother running. Zack Jackson 1:05:21 Don't bother planting an apple tree Adam Pryor 1:05:22 know, the apple tree anyway, it's gonna die. It doesn't matter. You keep doing the thing, plant the apple tree, Zack Jackson 1:05:30 throw the starfish back in the water. That's right, Adam Pryor 1:05:33 it won't make a difference. Ian Binns 1:05:37 So just carry on the way you're, you're going back. Zack Jackson 1:05:40 Who cares about recycling your wind? Where are the super volcanoes? Adam Pryor 1:05:43 So this is the interesting thing. They're actually like chained together, right? You can find these various volcanoes at major junction points between tectonic plates. There are 19 tectonic tectonic plates that we sort of move around on. So they shift a little bit, right. But we're familiar with these areas like so like the ring of fire in the Pacific, Pacific chains of islands. And if you want like an example of like where this has occurred, and history, India, like the entire subcontinent of Asia is just one large lava flow in terms of how it was produced, so that's the scale and size of which we're talking. All of these volcanoes erupting simultaneously. But yes, Yellowstone is a potential one. Although people don't think that that's actually there's some debated scientific evidence over whether or not it would be overdue for erupting so date. Yeah, Rachael Jackson 1:06:42 I don't like when Adam goes. Kendra Holt-Moore 1:06:47 The earth is weird. People are weird. Everything is Zack Jackson 1:06:52 awesome. And at the end of the day, the horseshoe crab and the Nautilus will keep going. Adam Pryor 1:06:58 I'm just saying like, I feel like Kendra and I can really lean into the jingle bit here. It's gonna be gonna be good. Rachael Jackson 1:07:06 Yeah. Stay tuned for that. Ian Binns 1:07:10 Yeah.
Episode 92 When is non-neurotypical behavior something to be 'cured', and when is it something to be celebrated? Is ASD a problem to be solved, or is society itself simply too inflexible to respond to that which does not easily conform? Have our religious institutions provided outlets for neurodiversity or are they a part of the problem? Let's talk about it! Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Adam Pryor 00:05 My name is Adam Pryor, I work at Bethany college. My favorite Halloween decoration is a giant, hairy spider that my wife got pretty early on when we were married. And it's motion censored so that when someone walks up to the door it goes. But oh, no, it's gonna do that. And it also shakes and it terrifies small children. Because it's like the size of the small child Ian Binns 00:47 and is in the bay? Adam Pryor 00:50 Yeah. Yeah, we we usually put it in a big web. And then it makes the whole web vibrate too. And it's made toddlers cry at our door, which I think is the goal of Halloween. Kendra Holt-Moore 01:07 So, Kendra Holt-Moore, assistant professor of religion at Bethany college and Lindsborg Kansas, and my favorite Halloween decoration is probably anything skeleton, but especially those skeletons to like sit in the rocking chairs on the front porch and just kind of like look out over the street watching people walk by they may or may not have motion sensors in them, but they still have life in them. Ian Binns 01:38 Ian Binns social professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte. My favorite Halloween decoration and we don't really decorate in our house, but I love walking through the neighborhood and just just seeing which house goes the most crazy, right? And how impressive it is almost like you know from home improvement that show when they would always go bonkers. It's like the TV shows always do the best Halloween things I love to see of houses come up with something like that. So it just varies every year on what my favorite would be. Which is not really answering the question. But as I said, I'm a little tired today, Punchy. Adam Pryor 02:22 And I couldn't break the rule of Ian Binns 02:25 Alright, right, Adam? So. Okay, so to segue into, Adam Pryor 02:30 there's no, there's no good segue. So as we've been like, as we've been talking about religion, mental health and issues of mental wellness. And, in particular, sort of focusing on different aspects of that the area that I was most interested in, when we started talking about taking this up were areas of mental health, mental wellness, where we, we really look at ways in which the world gets sees seen differently. And so the one that comes to mind for me, always sort of right out of the gate is thinking about the autism Asperger's spectrum. And a big part of that was in the summers, my wife wisely requires me to read some things that are not theology, especially when I was doing my PhD because I was a little mana maniacal. And so occasionally, she would go to the library and just bring something back and be like, just read this and stop for a while. Ian Binns 03:45 And she still does that, right? Yes, absolutely. Yeah. Because Adam Pryor 03:51 there's yeah, there's a there's a rule of how many workbooks I am allowed to take on vacation. Good. Um, Ian Binns 04:00 yeah, Kendra, listen. Yeah, it Adam Pryor 04:03 continues to get smaller and more irritating. But that's a difference. So So anyway, this this, this one year we were we were there. And she was like, You should read this book. I just finished it looks really, really good. And it was The Curious Incident of the Dog and the nighttime by Mark Haddon, which has now become a play as well, but I kind of encountered encountered it as the book. And the idea is that it's it's a mystery novel about the death of a dog, unsurprisingly. But the the central narrator is Christopher, who is a 15 year old boy. And Christopher, you learn as the book goes on, is sort of dealing with a nonspecific version of Asperger's. There's autism spectrum. And the author is just deeply clever about the ways of revealing these different experiences of the world that he has. Right. So the like, I remember sitting and being both, like irritated and sort of in awe of when the chapters suddenly skipped. So there was 123. And then it went to five, and there was no four. And I was like, bamboozled. And I kept flipping through the book and trying to figure out what's going on. And all of the chapters are prime numbers. Right. So there's the little, little details, right, that are intentionally put into the book to sort of create this, this sort of effect. What struck me about this as that may be a little different than some of the other disorders we've spoken about, but in some ways that are resonant as well. Autism Asperger's spectrum has a, I would argue, a generally more positive place in public discourse. Then some other mental health issues that we've that we've discussed. But also, there's this sort of interesting overlap with how it is that we raise up or minimize the voices of folks who have these experiences. Part of what struck me the very first time I was Reading this book, as being so important was that it did two things that I think are really impactful and important for thinking about in terms of religion, and mental health. One was that it humanized. The experience of living with Asperger's autism, in a way that as you were Reading the book, the book wasn't about someone with Asperger's, it was about Christopher Wright. And I thought that was really important and effective to remember, right. The second piece that I thought was really, really, really interesting out of that, was that it I found it at least sort of strangely affecting my teaching. And the ways in which I thought about engaging other students in the classroom. And this is the part that I don't, you know, that totally worked out. But one of the pieces that I thought was really interesting, and that is really important for me, as I started thinking about religion and mental health is that we, we make intentional choices about how, how to lift up, or how to cast to the side, non normative experiences. And religion, science, and I would argue, higher education, have a lot of roles in the ways we choose to or don't choose to do that. And so I found this book really meaningful, amusing to me, because it forced me to look at the ways in which I was treating non neurotypical students in ways that treated them as a disease vector in the classroom, not a human being. So, what's attracted me to sort of like thinking about autism, why I wanted to sort of pick this particular topic is that I think there have been so many really interesting accountings of trying to help people understand what experiencing the world, from this perspective is, like, in a way, this may be a little different than other mental health pieces, right? So like, yeah, I read The Curious Incident of the Dog of the night, but there are things like the good doctor, there have been blogs from Autism Speaks, that really, really work on helping people understand the variety of ways that this this experience occurs. And also, which I think is interesting, whether or not it should be cured. And what that even means is really really difficult when you talk about this topic. So I'm a little sad that that can rage on here cuz I wanted to like really poke at like, boy, but that's different in a religious community setting than it is where I am. But I'm curious. Just to sort of like start with like, what has been your experiences with Working with folks who would, quote unquote, be non neurotypical? Kendra Holt-Moore 10:09 Yeah, I could say, just, you know, what I was thinking of when you were talking are not necessarily the people that I know personally who were not neurotypical, but like people I know, people I know who I'm close to who are close to people with autism. And listening to the way that they have spoken about autism, like in my presence over the last, I don't know, five or so years, and how that has just been really interesting and eye opening. For me, and some of the ways that you're talking about Adam, of just like, you know, asking these bigger questions about what autistic people, like how autistic people see the world and how that, like there are aspects of that, like way of being in the world that it doesn't quite make sense for us to, like, pathologize, in the ways that we have, and, and so, you know, I don't, I don't know that I am aware of anyone that I'm close to who has autism. But yeah, it's just, it has been really enlightening, I guess, to hear people talk about the ways in which autistic people have like, sometimes a very hyper logical way of seeing the world and how that could, you know, be like, useful in different like problem solving settings that is just like a different kind of, like mental proclivity that like not everyone has even, even if you're just talking about like neurotypical people. And so, you know, they're, like, the neuro diversity of people. There are there, there are other like forms of neurodiversity that we just have decided, she's like, not categorize for whatever reason. And so, autism is something that we've like noticed as a pattern and have categorized it as autism. But if you think about what it means to be neurotypical, and this, like much broader sense, and like what neurodiversity is, in this broader sense, then it just makes sense. Like, it's just intuitive to, to think that like, Okay, we talked about people being like, right brained or left brained, and it would be probably odd for a lot of us to be like, Oh, the right brained people are, you know, they have a disease or something. And we, you know, it's like not, not to diminish the, like, difficult aspects of someone living with autism, because there's, like, you know, definitely, it's just true that, like, the system's not really built to accommodate them. And so that leads to a lot of problems for them, and in the classroom, and at work and in relationships. And so there's definitely, like, that's definitely there. But it's just interesting to think about how, like, maybe, maybe we could have systems in education and at work that actually did accommodate neurodiversity. You know, autism being an example of that. And, you know, maybe we could have systems that accommodate these people, and how would that how would that make the world different? How would that how would that change, like our social structures if we were including people who see the world really differently as people that were like in charge or had power in various ways to, to make us who we are? And and so that, I just think is like an endlessly fascinating question, especially listening to people. You know, try to like answer that question when they are living in like very close proximity to people who are very neurotic, neuro diverse and in different ways. Adam Pryor 14:36 No, so, what I was like what I was thinking about, Kendra, it's, it's that question of pathologizing. That I think is really, really interesting, right? And how we choose to how we choose to pathologize and what the consequence of pathologizing various mental health orders or disorders is is I think, really, really interesting. And, at least so far as we've been talking about this, right, when we've talked about depression, when we talked about anxiety, the way in which those get pathologized feels a little different than something like autism Asperger's spectrum. Ian Binns 15:18 Can you unpack that? What makes it feel different? Adam Pryor 15:22 So well, and that's like part of what I can't, I can't quite put my finger on it. Because but he like each week, we've been talking about it, I'm going like this is there. There's something here that's not quite the same, right? So like, there's an element with like, Ian, when both you and Zack have talked about anxiety and depression, right? There's a social stigma that this is inherently unacceptable, right? And there's sort of this element of like, I'll put it crassly like, just pull yourself up by your bootstraps, and you'll be fine. Get over it, get over it, right. Whereas with like autism, Asperger's spectrum disorder, there's a little bit less of the like, get over it. Element. Right. But also, right, there's this like, very clear element that like, people would be comfortable with me talking about someone with Asperger autism spectrum as non neurotypical. And I don't know if somebody would be comfortable with me saying like, Oh, you suffer from depression, you're not neurotypical. Right? Like, there's even this like disjuncture, in the language of how it gets pathologized. That I think is really is really fascinating. And makes me wonder, are the the ways that we talk about those, the ways that we talked about the impact of religion and science on that intersection with these mental health issues? Does that just look really different? In terms of how to how to move forward? Kendra Holt-Moore 16:59 Yeah, I think that's a really interesting question. And I like do you think out on that, because I also have that sense of, like, there's something different here. But as you're asking the question, I'm wondering, like, is it in part wrapped up with the fact that things like depression and anxiety, they're more centralized in like, the emotional aspect of a person's being, whereas something like autism or, you know, various other conditions are more, I'm not sure how to say it, but like, mental is not quite the right word. But like, they're, they're more integrated into, like, every aspect of a person's being. And it's not necessarily just about like, an emotional like, disorder, disordered experience. But it's like the way that you think the way that you feel the way that you take social cues the way that you you know, like, other behaviors that are not necessarily emotional, you know, at their core, but things like depression and anxiety, I see those as much more emotional in nature. And and I think this like, piece of how, like religious, I mean, not even just like religious people and traditions would maybe talk about them is that it maybe feels more acceptable to be like, Oh, someone with depression and anxiety like this is, this is not actually like a part of who you are, we, we, you know, can like help you, we can pray for you, we can, you know, get you counseling, do all these things to help restore you to like your person, whereas, I think not that people wouldn't also say that about other things like autism or other other conditions, but I think the approach in general would, would feel a little different. It's like, oh, this is who you are. So let's just accept you and love you and try to find a way to integrate you into our community in a way that is like loving and compassionate is like the kind of language difference that I would anticipate. Ian Binns 19:23 Well, I also wonder to the idea that when we think about anxiety and depression, it at least the the thought is from from some people is that like, so for me, where I want to talk about me, I have not had to deal with anxiety my entire life. It has not always been part of my life. Right? I still also deal with depression and that has not been part of my my entire existence. Whereas someone who either his, you know, either has Asperger's or autism that, you know, the and you know, to my special friends out there may want to beat me up later, I'm sorry for lack of a better understanding of the language to use and everything but you know, that it's almost like, well, it's something you're born with, or that's just part of who you are from the very beginning or, or something along those lines. Right. And so that there's a distinction there that people may view it as I'm not saying that's accurate. But I'm just wondering if that's part of the thing of as you as we were talking about, you know, toughen up when it comes to anxiety or depression is the mentality that some have, whereas with Asperger's, or autism or something like that, it's, you don't approach it that way. Right? Because it's part of your identity of who you are. Kendra Holt-Moore 20:51 Yeah, that was those basically what I was saying it, but I also want to add that, like, I, I think that there, it would be, this is something I think that Zach, especially would have something to say. But I think people who have like, severe chronic depression, and have like, had it since their early life would maybe resist the idea that like that's not inherently like part of who they are. That's, that's not the way that I tend to think about it or have, like, tended to talk about it. But I wonder if that's the case for someone like that, and with anxiety too, but I think like what I've tended to experience and notice in most of the people that I know, who deal with those things is that even in chronic cases, they're like, their highs and lows. And, you know, it's, it's yeah, it's just usually spoken about in these different ways. Ian Binns 22:02 Yeah. And just as a caveat, or a disclaimer, to anyone listening, please understand that, you know, I personally have been on some form of an antidepressant most of my life. So I do not, you know, my perspective minute ago is not something I necessarily hold to. I just wanted to say that that, you know, that is not how I view, anxiety or depression, you know, and we have had conversations before about when it comes to like, antidepressant medication and stuff like that, is that when I'm on that, does that is that the real me? Right, we've had those types of conversations in the past and how I am adamant that yes, that is the real me. Because that's the me that I want to be with. Right? So anyway, Adam Pryor 22:48 I think there's this like, question of identity that is wrapped up in all of the versions of like, how we've talked about the intersection of religion and science with mental health that I think is really important and interesting. And so like, you know, coming back to The Curious Incident of the Dog in the night, right? Like, despite my wife's best efforts, immediately after that, like I was deeply, deeply curious about, like disability studies and disability theology. And like, I just spent a lot of time immediately diving into this. So doesn't work. But Ian Binns 23:26 then what was the name of the book? Again, Adam Pryor 23:27 The Curious Incident of the Dog in the NightTime. Ian Binns 23:31 Okay, thanks. Adam Pryor 23:33 So, in what strikes me about that, and, and to me, the resources that religious traditions have been producing in disability theology over the past 25, or 30 years in particular, are so important, are just so important for it, for helping folks start to tease out how it is that we, we talk about this intersection of identity, and disability and pathology in ways that can be really effective, but also really challenging, right? Like, to my mind, the fact that we're having this conversation, and it's really hard to figure out like, Well, where do I categorize this? Like, you know, as human beings, we like nice, neat boxes that we can put these things into, right. And I think one of the really important things that disability studies has done and disability theology in particular has done has said, hey, look, those narratives that we've had in our traditions about healing and wellness, and in provement, and salvation, even can have really detrimental effects on the way that we think about and pathologize those who don't fit into the norm both in terms of physical health, but also mental health. in ways that can be either really helpful or really destructive. So, like, early on, Kendra, you mentioned this, like, it made me think of like doing like a thought experiment, right? Like, what? What would it start to look like if your social structures around you were designed for and put in place to facilitate engagement with folks who are non neurotypical? Right. Like, and I guess this is sort of like a, this is both, uh, something I think about a lot. Now that I do, I don't know, administrative II things. But also, like, I think a lot about in terms of like religious communities, right. Like, what are the things that we do that accidentally exclude people? Even though that's not what we mean to do? Oh, I Ian Binns 25:54 think that happens all the time. Yeah, I mean, I think so. The reflective process is what makes it challenging, because you have to really be willing to look at yourself to see how do you do that? Which I think takes a level of vulnerability. Because you're, at least to yourself admitting that, oh, I put people in boxes, by others, I other people, right. Adam Pryor 26:25 And, um, I guess there's like, part of me, that starts to wonder then, like, what's the role of religious communities in facilitating changes in that regard? Like, what are the steps that we would want? None of us are, you know, clergy, but I look at it sort of to go, you know, maybe into our own context to like, what are the things that we would look at around us and go like, that would really need to change? Ian Binns 26:53 Well, so. So for me, and this will actually tie into the book I want to talk about, at the end of the show, is, over the past year, and especially throughout the pandemic, you know, I've really struggled with how people, you know, aspects of society have approached the pandemic, with lack of empathy for others. Right, and like, what I perceive as a lack of caring, and it has led, especially me with it coinciding with such a toxic political timeframe in our country, for me to have very judgmental views of others, not necessarily other people that I disagree with politically, like someone who identifies as Republican versus Democrat, that's, that's not it, it's more of the extremes. Right. And so, I have found that I'm in a place where I struggle with that a lot. And so I've purposely been selecting different books and different resources to read as a way to get back to the point where, while I may disagree completely with someone and what it is they believe and stand for that I can still see them as a person. Right, not less than not inherently evil, or something like that, that I you know, but I'm aware of that, as I said, you have to be aware of those things happening. Kendra Holt-Moore 28:47 Yeah, I mean, I guess, when I think about like a religious context, again, not a clergy person, but it you know, if we're talking about, like autistic people in particular, I did attend a church. This was when I was in undergrad at church. And there was, there was a young man who started coming really regularly to the college ministry stuff. Who was on the autism spectrum. And I think that, you know, kind of reflecting on that experience, and just what it felt like on a Sunday morning to, you know, to speak with him and to like, watch them interact with other people. I think that like using the autism spectrum, as an example, the greeting time in the morning, in like religious spaces, and again, you could apply this to other organizations in which there's like this kind of loose social time of interaction where people are expected to greet each other or, you know, in like a conference context to like network with each other? Like, what is that? What does that look like? And how do you be accommodating or like welcoming to someone who might like, say something unexpected too. And if you're like, expecting a neurotypical person to be in those interactions, you might respond differently or be like, feel something like off putting or, you know, I don't know, feel awkward in a way that, like, shuts down this possibility for relationship. And I, I think I noticed, in general, like years ago, attending this church, that people, I think, for the most part really leaned into it, it was like, Oh, good morning, let's talk about the 20 pages of like, song lyrics that you wrote last night, and, like, let's like, do a deep dive. And that was just like this kind of particular interaction that you would have with this person. And, you know, maybe the next person you spoke to is just a brief handshake and like, a good morning. But it's just, I don't even know, like, how to speak about that in terms of like a system change. But it's just, I think, kind of a letting go of like expectations of what someone should, like offer you or like, bring to you. And I don't think that's always very easy to do. And it's also like, kind of exhausting to do that, if you are in a space where you're talking to, like, hundreds of people. So, you know, like, it's, I think it's a hard question to figure out what that would mean, to make a shift or like a transformation on a structural level. So I don't know, like, that's what I think of, when I'm thinking of like, the religious context, just like that particular example. But then I think in the academic context, like in my teaching, which, you know, there's like, a lot of things about being like a, in my first year as a professor that I, like, I'm learning a lot about, like my own pedagogy, and what's working and not working. And one of the things that I always feel very sensitive to, because of my own experience, as an undergrad and graduate student, are just people who are like, a little bit either, like a little bit are definitely diagnosed, or somewhere in between, really struggle with like, a DD ADHD type symptoms. And I think, like, that's, that's, it just changes the way like, you have students who are going to, like, read every single word of the page, and always do the Reading, like three weeks early, and, like, come to class and like, know exactly what they want to say. And then there are people who are just like, perpetual, like strategic skimmers, and our, you know, like, they have questions, but they kind of come in the moment, and it's not, it's kind of hard to, like, prepare how to, like engage in the classroom. And then, you know, they're like students who are just like, disengaged, they don't care. There's like, you know, a lot of things going on, or maybe they're just lazy. Like, there's a, there's a bunch of different student experiences. But I, I feel that, like, I have always sort of struggled with the, like, I don't have a diagnosis of ADHD, but I have struggled enough with like symptoms of that, that I have been tested, and have like, tried different, like medication and stuff for it. It's also the case that like, women are, in general, like less likely to have a diagnosis for that kind of thing. But it's been an inflamed part of my experience as a student during my PhD work, especially. And so I just feel like when I'm in the classroom, I try to figure out a way to, like, reward the students who are doing all the things like clearly excellent students, and then reward the students who are really trying, but they just like, there's just something about the process of like being a student, that's really difficult, but they're putting in the effort and they're showing up and they're trying to participate and so to like, do things in class that are engaging and that allow you to enter into the conversation, even if you didn't read and like remember every single person's name and every date and like, you know, all the like super specific details that some students that feels natural to them. And, and so I don't know, like I feel like that's the example that comes to mind because it's like in this, I think conversation of like neurodiversity, but you know, a different kind than what we've been talking about, but just figuring out how to like, have something for everyone to the extent that they feel that they belong either in the conversation, or in the religious community, or whatever it is. And that's really not easy to do. But I think it's worth it. If the goal is community, if the goal is inclusion, if those are really central goals to your organization, or religious tradition or whatever, then you have to do those things. And you have to figure out, I think, like how to reasonably pursue those goals. Always. So yeah, I don't know, those are, those are things that come to mind. Adam Pryor 36:07 Yeah, I mean, I, to me, it's interesting that the, like, the the two things that that stand out to me, or like the conversation can kind of broaden or narrow, right, because there are certain elements that I think overlap. Anytime you're trying to figure out how to discuss engaging neurodiversity, right, even if it's different types of neurodiversity, but also, right, there's this element of being really aware that the that the specific dimensions of that neurodiversity matter for what any, like whatever practical steps you would take. Lest I don't answer my own question. Yeah. Ian Binns 36:54 I mean, you've ever done that? No, Adam Pryor 36:57 it's not like I it's not like I make a habit of doing that. So I, the the piece that has come to mind for me, the more that I've thought about this, and I think just by sheer happenstance, I have ended up almost every semester that I have been teaching, like on a regular basis, I have had a small, not a majority, by any stretch of the imagination, but a small cadre of students who are not neurotypical. In fact, this may be the, like, the first semester where I don't. And it felt kind of weird. But I think one of the things that I've noticed about myself in those contexts is trying to ask over and over what are the expectations that I have of this situation, that privileged people like me? That if you are just a little bit more like me, you do better here? And how is it that I, what then is my responsibility to try and create a situation where I minimize that as much as possible? So the two instances that have come to mind for me are like, and I noticed, I just try really hard not to do any more. But in religious communities where I've been a participant, and I know there are folks, in this case, generally around Asperger's, Autism Spectrum Disorder, that are non neurotypical. The question that keeps coming up for me is, why do we preach every week? That seems really silly. And not a great way of interacting with those folks as part of the community. And I don't know, at least for me, having a week off from somebody giving a sermon feels like a good idea. Because that that's not my jam. And in a similar way, right, like when I think about, like, my time in the classroom, I think about in real instances, right? Like, where are the places that my my expectations about? Well, you would just do a little bit better if you could read the text more like me, or if you could sit still long enough, Ian, to actually just engage the way that I want you to engage. Right? Like I I find myself doing that. And like, for me, the step that comes out of this is to say like how do I how do I prevent myself from asshole mansplaining? Ian Binns 39:58 Yeah, before We can do that. Yeah, I just wanna say I don't mind. I still love you, buddy. It's okay even though you call me out, you know, and everyone can hear it. It's okay. Adam Pryor 40:16 Yeah, it's good. People don't see that he just wanders around while we're doing this. Ian Binns 40:21 Yeah. I'm still listening, though. But if I get hungry, I got a. Adam Pryor 40:25 Just I know. Yeah, I think I think wireless headphones were designed just for you. Ian Binns 40:32 This is probably true. Yeah. If the wired ones I had word noise canceling, I think I would probably pay attention a whole lot better to life. Right. So, yeah, anyway. Adam Pryor 40:46 No, but so these are the things that like I think about when I when I when I think about this piece, and it in terms of the religion and science conversation, I think the question that comes to mind are like, one, how do religious traditions decide whether or not they're responsible to folks in their communities? Who are not neurotypical? Like? What does it really mean to take responsibility for that? So that's one side. And then the other is, which we didn't talk a lot about today. But that's okay. Because there are always ways to talk about this, like, how much does science give us an out? I kind of wonder if science is giving us a Get Out of Jail Free card, right? Insofar as it lets us pathologize things. Right, like, I can only call out even if I pathologize the behavior that he's doing in a certain way, which science lets me do a lot better than I could previously. And in like that tension is something that like, as we talk about, like other elements of mental health, and religion and science, like I'm really interested in, in trying to tease that out. In large part, because I don't think it's really hard to do. And it's not something that's like intuitive to us, like, I can't rely on my common sense to find a way out of that. And also, like, they're not my stories, I am like a remarkably weirdly neurotypical, white cisgendered reader of tax who the system was designed for, like, if anybody should be able to be successful on it, it would be, you know, the guy given all of the privileges that the system was designed to foster and develop. So how it is and what then My responsibility is, as I hear narratives that don't fit that neurotypical neurotypical schema is, is, I think, really, really important. Because it can't, it can't just be the job of folks who aren't neurotypical to advocate for themselves. Kendra Holt-Moore 43:12 Right. And that question is such a, you know, like, to what extent is science give us an out? It's, it's just so hard because that that feels like a question that is like, this universal question. When in fact, like, there's so much about the context in which you're in, that I think changes the way that you might pathologize this behavior in one setting, but in another, maybe not so much. And that, you know, like, I think that's why there's, there's something really valuable about you know, the, the like, quizzes, I mean, some of them are not that good, but like quizzes or just like databases that try to connect people to different vocational goals based on personality characteristics is one thing but you know, like tendencies towards certain behaviors. And I don't know like I sort of see that as this like soft way of trying to address this issue of like where you fit like if you're someone who is high energy and easily distracted and you like love to talk to people. Maybe you shouldn't be like doing super mundane tasks and a dark office in the corner never having to speak to a human for like 16 hours of your you know, day. Like things like that that are really simple. And I think kind of taken for granted sometimes is this like, fun little self reflective task, but I actually think there's like maybe Maybe it's things like that, that are just resources available for people and to get people to self reflect in a more serious way about what your own strengths and weaknesses are and to not pathologize something that is a weakness and to not like, overvalue something that is like labeled a strength. But just to understand that, like, these are your strengths and weaknesses in this role. And to just I don't know, like, change the way that we value different behaviors and skills. Because there are so many different ways to apply those behaviors and skills in different like vocational organizational, like family, social contexts. And so I think, to some extent, like that will never be this simple question, it will entirely depend on how much time we're willing to invest in helping people develop self reflective skills to put themselves or like, you know, attempt to put themselves in situations that benefit their own, like proclivities, intellectually, and emotionally and physically and all of those, all of those things. So it's like, yeah, it's, it's a lot of work and people like that, it's, it's so easy to not want to do that work, because you have to kind of give attention to like, every person, and you can't rely on these generalizations. But like, it's just the nature of being human. And using language, we do generalize, we do other people, because it's convenient. And that sometimes is like, easy, unnecessary to do in certain situations. So it's like this constant tension of, you know, meeting the needs of the particular versus the, you know, General. Ian Binns 46:57 Well, that can be exhausting. Right? to I mean, it's, it takes a lot of effort, but then can be tiring, when you're trying to put forth that effort. For others, right, especially if you if you go all in, and you're always trying to be that way. Yeah, it can be tiring, and some people, you know, and there are times where I've just been, you fall back on the generalizations of type of different people just because it's easier. But then you realize, too, that if they're if it's a particular topic of something that you're focusing on as a way to instill some sort of change in people's behaviors, including your own, then you realize you need to take that step back momentarily, but then get get back to, to the work to the hard work. So you know, so it goes away from that whole notion of other people who are different? Adam Pryor 47:54 Well, we should probably move on to the ending part of the episode. Do that, edit that into? No, I don't want to say anything. Why would I want to say something, I don't want to make it easy for him. I want him I want him to really struggle with how it is that he's gonna try and wrap that up. Not here to defend himself. I'm not gonna give him anything easy. By which by which to do that. In good fashion, you probably should just leave this as my closing remarks so that everybody knows that it was my fault I've done as much cheery, happy as I could do today. And so I need some suffering to come out of this episode and that are really Ian Binns 48:50 proud. Well, yes, I am proud of you, buddy. Are you gonna go throw up after this? Adam Pryor 48:54 Probably. It's probably going to be like rainbows and sparkles. Ian Binns 49:03 That's how you got to end it and back back and be part of the title, rainbows. So okay, so for my little tidbit, at the end, my little thing I want to focus on, and I'll try it once or twice just to see how it works is I want to do a kind of talk about and reflect on a book that I either am currently Reading or have recently finished Reading. And yeah, so the book that I chose today actually, is called hold it up for the two of you but you belong. A call for connection by seven is a lossy, she is her description down here on the bottom. I love this nerdy black immigrant, Tomboy Buddhist weirdo. She describes herself but I learned of seven philosophy from 10% happier she's one of she's actually the most popular coach on 10% happier. And I've one of the many meditations in the beginning that I really liked that she did. But it was actually one of her, she's very much in to social justice work, and has a fascinating background. And one of the things that I, one of the meditations I do at 10%, happier that made me shift away from other meditation resources was one that she did about racism. And it was a very, a 20 minute guided meditation, that was a very deep dive into racism, and and trying to, you had to be willing to deal with your own level of vulnerability. Because it was not a deep dive necessarily into societal racism, or where it comes from, but looking within and reflecting on yourself. And so it was raw. And it was incredible, because I just loved how she approached it. And then I learned of the book that she was working on this book book called you belong. And instead of kind of start taking with different notes last night, that I had written throughout the book, but I just want to kind of give the general idea of what her whole argument is. And what she's trying to point out, is that she talks about in here, when she says you belong, is recognizing what the whole point of belongingness. And so she says early on belongingness truth, and it is the fundamental nature of reality right here now, whether we feel it or not. And so what she's trying to argue throughout this entire texts, is that belonging is everywhere, it is natural, that happens, everything is connected. And she very nicely kind of throughout, the entire text does a very good job of talking about how more things like ancient ways of knowing ancient wisdom. That, you know, the more scientifically minded individuals would say, is not real solely based on either, you know, something from different religious perspectives, or indigenous perspectives, and how modern science is starting to show, you know, the notion of connection, that everything is connected. And we've known that for a while now based on science, but that how that's been an argument or a part of the belief that people would call it based system within different as I said, you know, religious traditions or cultural traditions that have been going on for centuries, if not millennia, about this connection to everything. And that now science has shown it that that makes that real, right. And so how we kind of limit ourselves with our ways of knowing. And so throughout this, one of the things I really love about it, that she kind of really helps us understand. And this is one of the quotes, I love that she talks about. That she says. So I'll just read this, when you don't like the joke, you belong. When you're the only one of your race, disability or sexuality, you belong. When you're terrified to speak in public you belong, when you feel hurt, or when you hurt, have hurt someone else you belong. When you're down to your last dollars, and the rent is due you belong. When you feel overwhelmed by the horrors of human beings you belong. When you have a debilitating illness, you belong. When everyone else is getting married, you belong. When you don't know what you're doing with your life, you belong. When the world feels like it's falling apart, you belong, when you feel like you don't belong, you belong. And then she helps us kind of delve through helping us see how it is we belong. And so I just wanted to point out a couple other things and then I'll stop rambling, but she nicely sets sets us up sets up the reader as pointing out, you know, the importance of grounding yourself, especially when it comes to like things like meditation, knowing yourself loving yourself. So this is stuff that Adam you would totally love. Right? And there's a whole chapter about self love. Adam Pryor 54:15 I can go I feel I can feel ready to engage this text. Ian Binns 54:20 You should because it's something that will contrary Yes, this is Oh, I'm going to tell Rachel This is the book that she should recommend to you for the summer. Oh Adam Pryor 54:29 my god, you Ian Binns 54:31 Yes, I'm gonna I'm gonna fact I'll even buy it. Right. I'll buy it and connect yourself as another one. And then finally learning to be yourself. And so some of the things that really helped me along through this and it took me a very long time to read it because I just kept getting really interested in everything that was she was talking about is that she really does a nice job of helping us see the ways that we are connected. And as I said, one of the things that I'm starting Dealing with personally, is two people that I who, so individuals who identify, maybe they don't claim themselves as white supremacists, but their arguments indicate that they more long, you know, Lie with that mindset of white supremacy, that they are still a person, right, we may disagree completely on that perspective of things, but that they still do matter, they still are a person, we are still connected in some way. And learning that, that doesn't mean I have to agree with them, it just is recognizing that they are still a human, you know, and that they still do matter in some way. There's a great time where she talks about putting yourself in an ad in this kind of talks about what you said, if you do not have, if only you could do things the way I do things, you know, then this right, and then he joked about with me walking around and moving all the time. And seeing things and how that's something that I do a lot too. But what she did, she didn't talk about her own personal story without of learning on this journey of hers that she went through learning that we are, we are all connected in some way. And we all belong, is that she there was during the time of George W. Bush presidency, and how she completely disagreed with everything that he stood for. But that she started thinking, and she would always put herself in the I don't understand how you could come to that conclusion on these things. That doesn't make any sense, right. And we always do that. And I would argue I do that a lot now, especially with with the last presidency, and then you know, the situation on January 6, and all those things of how do you not see these things like it doesn't make any sense to me. That one thing it's important for us to understand is that we did not grow up in that person's life, that even if you know, we like to say that I like to think that if I were in that mindset that I wouldn't do those things. But that's not truly possible, because we don't have that person's life experiences. And so part of her process was recognizing that, while she may have disagreed completely, with what Georgia decisions made by George Bush, that they were still connected, and that she'll never truly be in that in his shoes, because she was not raised the same way. Right. And so trying to better herself and better understand where people come from. And so the last thing I know, I'm all over the place, and I apologize as usual. But one of the things I really like about this, because she kind of goes through, as I said, this whole notion of learning to look past or to recognize the role of your inner critic, and what the inner critic does for you, but not letting the inner critic takeover, the comparing mind of comparing ourselves to different aspects of society. And the dangers with that is that she says near the end, if you want a different world, we must imagine it, to imagine it, we must become intimate with our deepest wishes, we cannot imagine without a desire for creation, without longing for something different. We cannot connect our deepest desire without simply being we cannot long if we cannot, if we can't feel what it is we long for. And then she goes into meditation, I'm not gonna make you guys do that. But anyway, but what it did for me was is and it's still a work in progress is still trying to recognize that the role my inner critic place, as I talked about, in the last episode, the role that my anxiety plays. And and recognize instead of, because when I start going down that spiral with my anxiety, you know, one of the first things I'll happen is I'll fight the feeling of anxiety. And so then I'm now fighting two things. And so it's trying to remind myself that, while I don't like that feeling, I get during a very anxious moment that there is a reason it's happening. And so to, you know, treat it as, as I said, Last on our persona of saying, I know you're there, you're there to take care of me, but I'm in charge, right. So welcome to the party, but I'm in charge. And so that's that was really nice for me in this book. And so something I definitely recommend, again, it's called you belong by seven is a lossy. And it's just a beautiful book about learning about who you are and where you come from. So Adam Pryor 59:26 that's all it was. It was so nice. I felt like it would go very well Ian Binns 59:31 with one that Adam was leading to end with that. And as I said, Rachel prior, I will shout out to you that I will make sure that I get a copy of this book to you sometime before next summer. So that you can have it ready to go when you recommend a new book for Adam. And then he can give us his his view of it Adam Pryor 59:54 might be a fun point counterpoint version of what to do at the end of episodes. You could read a book and I could read one and We'll see what we both find. Ian Binns 1:00:01 Yeah. And then I'll have seven is the lossy they're ready to roll and she can come in. Just take us Adam Pryor 1:00:10 straight through 1:00:11 yeah
Episode 91 In part 2 of our mental health miniseries, Ian leads us through an achingly vulnerable and well-research exploration of Anxiety. What is it and how is it different from fear? What about anxiety disorders? Can you meditate your way to happy times, or are there too many complex chemical processes at work? Is Elf on a Shelf ruining our children and turning every waking moment into a nightmarish prison-scape? The answers to all those questions and the first ever "Dead Christian Story Hour" on this week's episode! Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 90 Welcome back to the podcast! After a brief break, we're back with new episodes to usher in our third year of podcasting. We're getting started on a personal note, delving into the science, spirituality, and personal experience living with major depression. What is it and what makes it difference from normal sadness? How do antidepressants work? How do our religious traditions affirm or condemn us in our time of need? All that and how to cure your sadness with electric fish and cocaine. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:04 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are Rachael Jackson 00:15 Rachael Jackson, Rabbi at Agoudas Israel congregation in Hendersonville, North Carolina, and my superpower is my level of patience and ability to keep going. Ian Binns 00:34 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte, and I believe my superpower is teaching Adam Pryor. Adam Pryor 00:43 I work at Bethany college and Lindsborg Kansas. My superpower is the ability to suck the energy out of a room at any moment I choose. Zack Jackson 01:01 Or infuse it at any point. Ian Binns 01:06 It's like the de luminator from Harry Potter, instead of taking the mite away. That's right, all the energy that's right. Kendra Holt-Moore 01:14 Kendra Holt-Moore Oh, wait, though. Assistant Professor of religion at Bethany college and Lindsborg Kansas. I'm my superpower is the ability to not sleep whenever I have anything that needs to be done. So much so that it disturbs everyone around me who loves me and there is a name for this creature that no longer is Kendra. But instead they call our neck, which is my name, but Zack Jackson 01:58 it's a great name, though. Ian Binns 01:59 Yeah. Zack Jackson 02:02 Zack Jackson UCC pastor in Reading Pennsylvania, and my superpower is the same superpower as Abraham Lincoln. Once Abraham Lincoln's superpower, I'm so glad you asked. Because that's what I want to talk about here at the beginning of this episode. Wait a second, actually, my superpower is transitions because oh, man, that was a good one. You don't make that transition. Even better is talking about the transition. Oh, man, everything is Christian. I'm so happy to be back. By the way, this this break to had was helpful in planning. And I know all of our lives are going crazy right now. But like Rachel said, It is good to be back. So um, this being a science and religion podcast, I do think it's important for us to instead talk about American history. Ian Binns 03:04 Another one of those transitions. Adam Pryor 03:07 You're gonna work Abe Lincoln in there, no matter what. Zack Jackson 03:11 It's, you know, year three, and Abe Lincoln is starting like your one did with Thomas Paine. We're just gonna name drop along the way. Adam Pryor 03:21 I can't hate on Abe Lincoln, though. Zack Jackson 03:28 Oh, man. But I want to talk for a second here at the beginning about the difference between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas, because there's a lot of differences. And way back in the day in 1858, the two of them were locked in a tight Senate race in Illinois. And, you know, a Senate race in the Midwest in the 1800s was not all that exciting, generally speaking, not like Senate races today. But this one was special. This was the very first instance of American political theater, which we all have come to know and love slash hate. today. Most of that being the fact that it seemed like the issue of slavery was finally going to get talked about because it's been kicked down the road by generations and generations. But now with new states forming now we had to actually talk about the thing. And these two men, they stood on opposite ends of that spectrum. And also, there was a whole lot of new fancy technology that was making this local race into something more national, there was this newfangled thing called the electric telegram, which allowed news of things to spread hundreds of miles 1000s of miles, like in an instant. They also had all of these new trains all throughout the Midwest. And what would happen in these debates is these two men had Is that there would be stenographers there, and they would be writing down the transcript in shorthand as they went. And then at halftime, because there definitely was a halftime, they would give their notes to a person on a train. And that person on the train would write out the shorthand into long form. And then at the end of the train would hand it to the typist at the newspaper, who would then start and then at the end of the debate, the second half would get there. And so by like an hour and a half after the debate was done, the full transcript was already written and ready to be printed in the newspaper, which then got sent all over the Chicagoland area and out into the Midwest and like, this sort of thing had not happened before. So these men were not just talking to, you know, the good folks of Freeport or Galesburg, or whatever, but they were also talking to people in New York, in Virginia, they have this, this debate about slavery became bigger than just this local race. So on one side, we've got Stephen Douglas, a man that is not on any dollar bills. Because he though he won this race, spoiler, sorry. History kind of forgot about him. He was a little guy with a big mouth. He was known by his contemporaries as the greatest debater in generations, if he couldn't convince you and the crowd of the truth of what he was saying, then he would find a way to destroy his opponent so badly that everyone thought the other person was an idiot. He was he was amazing at what he did. He was confident. He was well known. He had the backing of the well established Democratic Party, he had great hair. And then on the other side, we've got Lincoln, a man who was six foot four, and 178 pounds, like literally a scarecrow. And he had a high pitched squeaky voice, and wore a giant hat that made them look even bigger and skinnier, like visually, not a great guy. He was also the member of the Republican Party, which was brand new, didn't have a lot of support. And at the time, he was neither pro slavery nor pro abolition. So he made everyone mad, and nobody really appreciated his position. So like on paper, this should have been such a landslide that we never heard of this Abraham Lincoln guy ever again. But Mr. Lincoln had a superpower. He did a superpower which would propel him into the national spotlight and eventually lead to his presidency. Abraham Lincoln's superpower severe clinical depression. That's right. Severe clinical depression though they didn't call it that. Back then they call it melancholia. But now if he were to be diagnosed, that's exactly what he would be diagnosed with. Which Same as me. So me and me and Ava were like the same guy. Except he was six, four and 178 pounds and I'm six, three and 270 pounds. So you know, a little bit bigger. But anyway, six, three, I am six, three. Ian Binns 08:26 I did not know that. Zack Jackson 08:27 I know. I'm only about four inches on your screen. But yeah, real life. Adam Pryor 08:32 Okay, carry on. Sorry. Zack Jackson 08:36 So, there are a couple of times in his life that he he went on, like an unofficial sort of suicide watch, where his family, his friends and family in the neighborhood would take turns checking in on him every hour or so. He couldn't get himself out of bed. And his people were worried about him. They removed every sharp thing out of his house. They brought him meals, and this would happen for like weeks at a time. He told a friend of his once that he never carried a pocket knife on him because he couldn't trust himself. There was one time when he was running for Senate, a little girl came up to him with her autograph book and asked for an autograph. And he wrote in this autograph book. The girl's name is Rosa. Rosa. You are young and I am older. You are hopeful I am not enjoy life. Eric grows colder pluck the roses air they rot Ian Binns 09:38 Wow. Just makes you feel Zack Jackson 09:43 warm. fuzzies right. For a little girl pulled out and looked at it was like Oh, thanks. I guess it's I think maybe he had some of Adams superpower in there too. Yeah. So, us, people, we people who live with this sort of depression, we kind of, we find ways to cope with it in the day to day grind, how to get through the day when we feel like our souls being sucked into a black hole. For me, I have always found music to be a good outlet, writing music, playing music, or being in nature has always been helpful. For Lincoln, it was being overly productive. He just worked himself until he fell asleep. And really sad poetry, which he wrote, and which he memorized other people's and used to recite at dinner parties. And that would suck the energy out of the room when he did. Or horribly inappropriate humor. He loved dark humor, too, I think most of us who are depressed, like dark humor, but those fixes are kind of like insulin for a diabetic. They, they help you get through the day. But they don't cure anything, they don't fix anything. So his his real transformation came in 1842 when he was 31 years old, and he checked himself into a hospital and received intensive mental care which 1842 this is before there was real medication, or this is pre Freud, and all of that. And so intensive psychiatric stay in those days meant a lot of sleep, quite a bit of cocaine, and Mercury and perhaps some electric shocks. Which by the way, on a side note, people have been using electricity to try to solve head problems since at least the first century. I found I found this out from there's a doctor named scrub bonitas largas. And he writes that if you have a headache, all you have to do is catch yourself a torpedo, which is a type of electric Ray, like, like a sting ray that lives in the Mediterranean, and then put it on your head, and let it electrocute you a few times, and then throw it back in the water and then you'll be fine. Rachael Jackson 12:21 That's genius. Zack Jackson 12:23 Yeah, so we've been electrocuting ourselves to make ourselves feel better for a very long time. And we're still doing it. And I'm going to talk a little bit about that later. But whatever he did in there was enough to get him well enough to get out and to get a mission. Like he started to see his depression differently. After that, like it was it was less of something that he suffered through and more of something that he could use for a better purpose. He, he he decided that he should use his suffering, to help alleviate other people's suffering. You see, studies have shown that happy people are really bad at fighting injustice, like truly awful. And I'm sorry to all of you happy optimists out there. It's just not your gift. Happy people tend to overestimate their abilities. They trust people too much. They see the world through rosy colored glasses. And so they don't see the need to change things all that much, because things don't look so bad to them. But we people with depression, we are under no such delusions, we think we can't stop seeing the things that are wrong, because that's just how we see the world. And we're a lot more able to empathize with the downtrodden because we are so often downtrodden ourselves. So our superpower kind of also our kryptonite, also. So Lincoln took that melancholic heart and He pointed it towards the systems that kept kept people enslaved. And while other people talked about slavery as a political issue, as issues of, of, of laws and regulations and logic and history, and blah, blah, blah. When he got up there, he spoke from his heart. And people like modern historians would say that, like, you felt what he felt when he spoke, like when he spoke, you knew that every word that came out of his mouth was coming out of his heart, and that he wasn't just a politician, that he wore his heart on his sleeve. And that level of authenticity is just so rare, that vulnerability and authenticity is so rare in in people that when a person like that comes around who's willing to speak so freely from their own feelings, it's like people listen, you know, Fred Rogers style, people connect with that on a deep level. So that was what came through and all of the communications all of the The newspaper articles that came out, they'd be like, wow, yeah, Douglas was great. But man, Lincoln really believes what he says. And that kind of authenticity became the fuel that would propel him into the White House. Eventually, he, he turned his coping mechanisms into the keys that would unshackle millions of people. His love of poetry became these heartfelt speeches, his need to stay busy kept him focused on the work of emancipation, his dark humor became something that endeared him to people in ways that other politicians didn't, he was just such a unique person who learned how to use his, his depression, for good. And that's something that I can relate with a lot, as somebody who has spent my whole life struggling with depression, and not naming it until I was, I don't know, maybe five years ago, or so, I've talked about my own journey of mental health a bunch of times on this podcast. So suffice to say, I only started seeking treatment a few years back. And it was only when I realized that I wasn't really able to be the father that my son needed that like, I couldn't get myself up to care for this baby, I couldn't feel deeply for him, I couldn't. And I had this this struggle, this debate, when I started taking my first medication. It was like, I stopped being able to be so creative, because music and creativity was one of my outlets for my depression. And so I'd only known how to be creative in depression. And so without the depression, I stopped being creative. So I had to make a choice. At that point, it was like, do I focus on the, on my son on parenting on trying to empathize with him? Or do I focus on my creative pursuits. And that was legitimately hard, because a lot of my identity was wrapped up in that. And sometimes I still wonder, like, what it would be like if I was not on any medication, but I, I'm really grateful that I have chosen to stay on. And from what I've learned about, like, what the signs of depression is, really confirmed that, that it's really important to stay healthy, and not just to get better for a while. And I'll explain why in in a bit after our first break, but yeah, so so my own personal journey, I feel like has mirrored Lincoln's, in some ways, obviously, on a much smaller scale. Ian Binns 17:51 So far, Zack Jackson 17:53 so far, sure. But in realizing that the thing that has been my burden my whole life, this depression, actually has become one of my superpowers, not only being able to empathize with people, and to be present in suffering, but to also have the ability to speak from a place of knowledge for people into people's lives who are suffering is not something that somebody without depression can do. And so I'm coming to terms with then how to see that in myself, I'm starting to see it more in characters in Scripture and throughout history. And we'll talk about that in just a minute. But let's take him just just a brief moment. 20 seconds to breathe, because that was pretty heavy. So one of the most helpful books for me. It's written by Andrew Solomon, it's called the noonday demon, an atlas of depression, which if you haven't read, you should if you suffer from depression, it's really helpful. And if you don't, it's really helpful in helping you to empathize with someone else. In trying to define even what depression is. It's very difficult, but he says, grief is depression in proportion to circumstance. So everyone has grief. Depression is grief out of proportion to circumstance. It is tumbleweed distress that thrives on thin air growing despite its detachment from the nourishing Earth. It can be described only in metaphor and allegory. St. Anthony in the desert, asked how he could differentiate between angels who came to him humble and devils who came in rich disguise, said that you could tell by how you felt after they departed. When an angel left you, you felt strengthened by his presence. When a devil left you felt horror. Grief is a humble angel who leaves you with strong, clear thoughts and a sense of your own depth. Depression is a demon who leaves you horrified. Which has totally been my experience of the thing. Again, it's a great book, because it's really hard to describe the, what it feels like to be depressed. And it's even harder to describe the physicality of depression. Can I tell you on a personal note, when I first saw my psychiatrist, and I was like, Hey, can you explain to me what's going on with my neurotransmitters? Like, I've heard I don't have enough serotonin, or I don't have enough of what is this? And it's making me and he said, Oh, well. Alright. So there's a certain sort of neuro mythology out there. That which is a great word, by the way, neuro mythology, that the only thing that is wrong with a depressed person is they have some bad chemicals. They don't have enough of them, or they have too much of them, and there's just out of whack. And if you fix the chemicals, you'll find it. I say it's neuro mythology, because it's too easy. It gives an easy answer to a complicated question. When in reality, we don't entirely know. So we kind of accidentally stumbled into these medications called SSRIs, or Selective Serotonin re uptake inhibitors. And they seem to boost the level of serotonin, which seems to make some depressed people better. So then by correlation, perhaps a lack of serotonin was the reason for their depression. And that's kind of we're just kind of trying things, throwing them out the wall. And if it raises your levels, you're fine. Because the thing is, you can't tell what your what the levels of neurotransmitters are in your body without a spinal tap. Because of that whole blood brain barrier. So there is no way for them to know what your chemical levels are like, and what your neurotransmitters are able to do. And so we just kind of throw things at a wall until they work. So just like on a very basic level, throwing these words around, when any part of your body wants to communicate with any other part of your body through your nervous system, it there's an electric charge that goes through the neuron. And then it gets to the end, where it releases a number of different neurotransmitter chemicals into the little space in between, they call that the synapse. And then they float around and they go over to the next neuron. And when they touch that there's receptors, and they kind of like, you know, the square one fits in the square hole, and this one fits in the circle hole. And they, they go in, and when they latch in there, that tells that neuron Oh, okay, so that's the thing we're doing, okay, cool, and then sends electrical signal down again. And so if you lack a certain type of, of neurotransmitter of chemical, then the transmission is less than good. And so like serotonin, we have found is really important for mood regulation, and for self control for energy. So like, we just assume that people who show these symptoms maybe lack these neurotransmitters. And when we do experiments where we boost them, pay, they get a little bit better. So we assume that they're connected, but we don't honestly know how. And it seems like there are some things having to do with maybe damage in the brain itself, or chemical levels. And then obviously, there's a part of it that's like learned that psychological where it's like you're dealing with trauma, and it's so complicated. And I wish it were as simple as just take a pill, and then you're fine. Me too, right? Ian and I are on the same medication. So we have some solidarity there. Ian Binns 24:35 I feel like it's a hit or miss process. Zack Jackson 24:37 And it really is and you don't know if it's going to work for like two weeks and then could either Ian Binns 24:43 be okay or utterly miserable. Zack Jackson 24:47 I was transitioning medications at the beginning of the pandemic. And then during Holy Week and Easter in a pandemic while transitioning medications with two small kids at home, and it was the Worst couple of months of my life, because all of my chemicals were thrown out out of balance because of that, you know, and then life itself circumstances were awful. Adam Pryor 25:11 I feel like the short answer, whenever you end up talking about brain chemistry is like, it's not simple. Like, there should just be like an Asterix by every study about brain chemistry to be like, maybe Rachael Jackson 25:27 for these particular people only. Zack Jackson 25:30 Yeah, I mean, the future of this is in figuring out the genetic markers that cause certain things. Because we know that mental illness can be hereditary, I could trace the, the melancholia, in my own family, between, especially through the men in my family, and all of the men in my family chose to deal with it in different ways. Some of them through alcoholism, and secret vices, and some of them through religiosity and prayer. And some of them like me, through medication, and, and therapy, we kind of have all found ways of dealing with this thing that's gone through our bloodline. And my doctor tells me, you know, once we can isolate a bit better, which genetic markers are involved there, we can then just take a DNA test, and then they can create a medication for you, that is tailored to you. And so now it's just like, hey, here you go. Rachel made me a wonderful cross stitch, and sent it to me that says, If you can't make your own seratonin storebought is fine. And I love it and it's in, it's on my wall. Because I need that reminder, the storebought is fine. It's way more important to stay healthy than it is, even if I don't understand the process of it, even if it's like, I hate the fact that my happiness comes from a bottle, I should be able to do this on my own. I'm strong enough now that I don't need this anymore. And I've done this to a bunch of times where I've been like, well, I've been good for six months now. So I'm going to tell my doctor, I want to get off this medication. And then he'll be like, Well, okay, if you say so. And then I'll, I'll have a horrible regression. And then it will be like, Okay, we got to start again. And then it takes me a while to get back on. And it's just the whole thing, because my goal is to get off of the medication and to stop having to have my happiness in a bottle. But the problem is that depressive episodes are a bit like concussions in that every time you have one, it gets easier to have another and they last longer. And they're a little bit worse, actually. Jon Gruden, who's the department chair for Lopez and young. He studies long term effects of sustained stress in the depressive episodes. And he wrote that if you have too much stress and too high level of cortisol for too long, you start to destroy the very neurons that should regulate the feedback loop and turn down the cortisol levels after stress is resolved. Ultimately, this results in lesions to the hippocampus and to the amygdala, a loss of, of neural networking tissue, and the longer you remain in a depressed state, the more likely you are to have significant lesioning which can lead to peripheral neuropathy. Your vision starts to fade in all kinds of other things can go wrong, which reflects the obvious fact that we need to not only treat depression when it occurs, but also to prevent it from reoccurring. Our public health approach at the moment is just wrong. People with recurrent depression must stay on medication permanently not cycle on and off of it. Because beyond the unpleasantness of having to survive multiple painful depressive episodes, such people are actually ravaging their own neurological tissue. Kendra Holt-Moore 29:03 Hmm. Blood Pressure just spiked. Listening to that. Ian Binns 29:10 My watch did tell me to take a breath, Zack Jackson 29:12 your cortisol levels just went up hearing that and you need to find a way to get him back down again. Sustained stress is bad for you. There are natural ways, right? Y'all I'm sure have natural ways of calming yourself. Right. What do you all do when you're in this sustained periods of stress? Rachael Jackson 29:38 I crossed it. Zack Jackson 29:40 Yeah. Adam Pryor 29:43 I ride my bicycle. Kendra Holt-Moore 29:47 I paced around the living room. physically exhausted myself. Ian Binns 29:54 I will go out, sometimes about side. Sometimes I'll meditate. Though the Lego do a puzzle, something like that. I picked up golf again, on vacation. So there are times when I've gone to the driving range, if I have the time, I found while on vacation, there was a we always play when we're down there. And the last few times we've gone I haven't played I'd started to bring my old clubs that my dad gave me years ago. So they're very old. And we, I would play with play with my father in law and brother in law down there and I was hitting it pretty well. And it's just like, it's kind of fun. I'm not taking it seriously. I'm just out here enjoying myself and then one afternoon while we were there. It was a lot of downtime. We weren't doing anything. And so I just kind of look my wife and said, Honey, I think I want to go play nine holes by myself. You're out with it. She said sure. So I've called the course because I made some courses right there and they said Yeah, come on. So I went play nine holes by myself put my headphones in and listen to a podcast. And it was a great two hours. Like it really helped. And so we found that Wow, that's so now I bought a new set of clubs. not expensive though. But it's it's very therapeutic. And I found that it's nice for me to go out there and just do that this time for myself to think and and just or let go. Zack Jackson 31:20 Yeah, well, I was gonna say I hear two themes that the neuroscientist Andrew Newberg has talked about a lot in his books, the the arousal and acquiescent systems in your body, the the ones that you get pumped up, and the ones that you get brought down. And in both of those, if you overdo it, you're the thinking part of your brain starts to shut down, as it focuses on just that part. And you get out of your spatial awareness you get out of your cognitive areas, the parts of your brain that are overthinking that are causing the feedback loop of cortisol to keep going. And so when you work yourself out, like on a bicycle, or walking or running, you're flooding your body with such high levels of these, these chemicals that it's like whoosh, wash afterwards, or if you're doing something repetitive, like cross stitch, or knitting, or golf, or meditation or something that does the opposite, that relaxes you so much that it gets you out of that, that cycle than that to, then once that stupid thinking part of your brain is done overthinking, then the natural parts can get through and flesh it all out. I mean, you see this in religious ritual, right? You either have things like tribal dances, right with the drums and the repetitious things, or you have something like a meditative, like the home, the sound of a slow Bell or something. You even see that that's the difference between modern Christian worship songs and old timey hymns is, is the same kind of deal. You're trying to either raise yourself up and do it an ecstatic state or bring yourself down into a lower state. But both of them are trying to get out of your own head to let your brain fix itself. And that's so important. Rachael Jackson 33:17 I love I love that I love this idea of especially in religious contexts, without even necessarily knowing why we're doing those things, right, as you're saying those. In Judaism, there's a there's a word for it called a knee goon. And a goon is a wordless melody, or a repetitive, a few words melody that will come up frequently. And we'll just say the same thing for 235 minutes, it'll be the same thing. And there's really something very powerful about that. And so it's nice to know why it works. Kendra Holt-Moore 34:16 Think it's also really scary, like the people that I know who have depression and have tried, or are in the process of trying all the various medications and nothing's working. It's just scary to her. I feel very much for those people who want a medical solution and are not sure how to navigate like, at least in the meantime, until something works if something is going to work. Not everyone knows how to navigate like other activities to help manage those symptoms. And that When people become really desperate, and so, yeah, I just, I, I know that that is a very scary process for people to just mean it's hard to like go on antidepressants anyway, like it takes, there's an adjustment period and all of that, but for nothing to work, I know people who are like, you know, trying the last thing before they go into like anti psychotics. And that's a whole other category of drugs. That is very, I mean, like, you don't want to mess with that stuff, if you don't have to, because, you know, that's, you have a whole other set of issues that can come up with, with those things. And, yeah, it's just, it's a lot, it's a very confusing puzzle that for some people seems to like not really have a solution, except, you know, whatever it is that you can try, that makes life a little bit more manageable. And like, giving you that ability to reach, not not happiness so much, but like a state of equilibrium. It's like all people really want at that point. Zack Jackson 36:15 There's some really exciting breakthroughs in transcranial magnetic stimulation. Previously, the last ditch option for people is to, like knock them out unconscious, and then electrocute them a bunch of times in the head, electrode thought shock therapy, it's silent and can lead to memory loss and all kinds of things. But this technique, which is been approved, but your insurance won't pay for it until you've tried, literally everything else takes off course, right? focused electromagnetic stimulation into very specific portions of your brain. So they do a brain scan first. So they can identify where exactly your how your brain is situated. And then they'll do these wonderful tests, where they'll like, they'll, they'll try to locate your like motor centers. And then like, once your hand twitches, they'll be like, oh, yep. Okay, so that's where that is. And then Okay, your nose switched, okay, that's where that is. And then they can triangulate where your mood centers will be. And then use this magnetic stimulation through, like this special hat, it looks like the kind of thing that you use at a like a beauty salon to dry your hair. And it just stimulates that one part. So it's really focused on just that one part. And it, it basically exercises it because the theory is that it's underdeveloped. And so it's like it's massaging it, and it's helping it to move and whatnot. And so you do this for every single day, it's a half hour sessions every day, for a month. And then after that, most people are fine. And they might need to come in for a tune up every couple years or so. But instead of like medication that increases the, the chemical levels in your, in the synapses, this goes straight to the brain, and tries to help massage an underdeveloped part. And it seems to be working really well. And there's a lot of new breakthroughs in the technology. And if insurance would catch up and help more people get it, then it would be it would be so helpful. But I love the fact that we discovered 1000s of years ago that you could electrocute your head and feel better and that we are still doing the same thing but with science. Rachael Jackson 38:52 It was science back then, too. They just didn't know why. Zack Jackson 38:56 I call it that. Yeah, he also used to use sting rays while the electric rays to cure hemorrhoids too. But I didn't look into the specifics of how that word Rachael Jackson 39:08 awkward interesting. Kendra Holt-Moore 39:09 I have so many questions. Rachael Jackson 39:12 I don't want to know the answers. I love this idea. And I think and without getting so much on that soapbox. I'm just moving past that conversation guys. Without getting so Adam Pryor 39:26 jealous derailing. Like, no, no, no. That's all I'll do. I'll stop I'll stop Rachael Jackson 39:35 is one of the challenges that we have in westernized medicine. And I'm framing it that way because I think even in places that have universal health care, which you know, America certainly needs to get on that bandwagon. But even in those places, it's still crisis management. It's not actually preventative or care. It's It's, it's all emergency medicine, it's all Something is wrong, let's treat what's wrong. Not let's actually figure this out way upstream. So the insurance industries, but also just our frame of mind of saying, we don't have to wait until we see where something is wrong, to try to help a person live the best life that we know they can live. And I think if we change our mentality with that, where we can catch up for a holistic perspective of what life can look like, will enable each other to to thrive in ways that we're not yet capable of. And then I also just want to respond to partly what you were saying, Zach, but not directly to you, but to the concept of this mental health and this, so several people very close in my life also suffer from deep clinical depression. And I suffer so and I have suffered from not clinical depression, but situational. And so it's very, very different than that. But having said that, when I look at our screen, three of us are wearing glasses, right? And we hear this idea, or you have said yourself, sack, you know, I wish, I just wish I wouldn't have to take it out of a bottle. And I wish, you know, I could just find happiness this way. And we've learned that health is health, regardless of whether it's mental health or physical health or emotional health, health, spiritual health, right? It's health. And if we're unhealthy, then we need to do whatever it takes to get us healthy. And none of us are going to be like, Oh, I just wish my eyes would work. And I'm just not gonna wear my glasses today. Because maybe today will be the day that they just decide to work. Maybe today, I'll wake up and my, my astigmatism will magically mend itself. We never ask a person to make that kind of ridiculous jump. And that because we recognize that that's just not going to happen. I'm never going to not need my glasses. Unless perhaps I go through some sort of surgery, in which case, it may or may not help it, but probably not like, especially with my astigmatism, I'm always going to need glasses. And, and there's nothing wrong with that. And so I think if we get to the point of as a society, and then hopefully internally to say, okay, so there's something going on with the physical part that we don't fully understand. We don't know why this is happening. We don't know why this part of your brain needs to massage or is underdeveloped, or these chemicals are or are not working. We don't have the why yet. But if we can get to a point of at least saying, great, we have something that's working. Why make a person feel bad about that. And don't expect yourself to be any different tomorrow. Adam, you don't like this? Adam Pryor 43:19 Wow. You know, like no Rachael Jackson 43:22 poker face. Adam Pryor 43:22 I'm not on board with like shaming people about mental health. Let me start there. That's not okay. Clear? Yep. I'm on board like, okay, so like, usually when I disagree with you, it's just like, full like, No, it's not that Ian Binns 43:42 nobody can see, can I stop just for a minute? Can you make sure you include all of that in this transition? Cuz fumbling is is awesome. Sorry. So Adam Pryor 43:52 here. This is what I wonder about though, right? Because I like the I like the eyeglasses analogy, right? So nobody says I'm going to wake up in the morning be like, Ah ha, today, I won't wear my glasses, and my eyes will work. But also, right, like, this is a problem that's really well explained by the reductionism of science. Right? Why do I put a lens in front of my eye because I have a very clear understanding of how the light is refracting into the wrong spot. Right Rachael Jackson 44:21 now, but 500 years ago, we didn't Adam Pryor 44:24 know but those pieces of being able to answer the why and the development of the technology were much more parallel than what's going on here. And I think this is the place where I look at I go like, I wonder if issues of mental health fall into a very different category, because I'm not sure there is a good reductionist answer to the why. Like, there's a little part of me that says, like, is this a problem at which science starts to break down in its investigation, because the rules of how science investigates things can't ask all the right questions Rachael Jackson 45:03 while still living within an hour, an ethical and moral way of treating human beings. Absolutely, Adam Pryor 45:08 absolutely. Right. Right. But even I mean look like even if you do some of the things that aren't moral or ethical, you may run into some fundamental problems were because these issues, bridge that element of the reductive descriptive nature of neurotransmitters, and big feelings. You know, as my teenager is having, right? There's some, there's some drugs that should be invented for puberty, I've decided Ian Binns 45:48 a couple of years. Adam Pryor 45:51 So this is like, I do sort of wonder like, does this become a space, particularly in things like religion and science conversation, where it doesn't follow the neat categories that we have to talk about that. And I think the the hope, especially in Western culture, is that we've put in medical science to be able to do those sorts of things, or are in to heal in very specific ways, the bounds of what that means are really stretched in this case, which, you know, only adds to the feeling of anxiety and depression in the situation. Zack Jackson 46:54 So what has been your experience from the religious side of depression? Adam Pryor 47:02 I actually wanted to ask you Zack, like, do you use any, like, specific religious traditions? Zack Jackson 47:09 In what way Adam Pryor 47:10 in terms of thinking about ways of, of managing or, or trying to address those feelings of depression, Zack Jackson 47:18 or when you're talking about managing religions have done a great job with that, I mean, they always talk about doing yoga, for example, doing something to get into your body, or meditation, something to get into your mind. prayer and whatnot. You know, I, personally, I've said this before, too, it's kind of my religious tradition, when I was discovering my depression said that you're too blessed to be stressed, and that depression is a problem for atheists and not for Christians. And, you know, so I know I've worked with, I've worked with my therapist on this, I know that those things are not true. I find more comfort in looking at some of the people in Scripture, like Jeremiah, for example, the weeping prophet literally wrote a book of the Bible called Lamentations. All he does is cry. He is a sad emo boy, who felt so deeply the destruction of Jerusalem, that he couldn't help but weep and his weeping became the song of a generation, and helps other people to deal with the trauma that they were experiencing. And it's something that probably only someone who feels the depths of despair like that can can do. And so like God using him, not in spite of his depression, but because of it was something it's just important for me to, to help categorize my feelings, give them validity. Rachael Jackson 49:01 I'll add to the religious side to that. In our tradition, it's not necessarily taboo. And it my heart just hurts hearing this idea too blessed to be to be depressed, like it just is revolting. But also we have this term called Shonda, right? It's public shame. So don't talk about it. We're not going to tell you you don't have it. Y'all feel it, but we don't talk about it. And that's where I've decided to make a big change, right saying no, absolutely. We talk about it and using those subtle signs as well as the obvious science, like on my bulletin board in my office, I have, you know, the here's the suicide hotline, business card, and here's the phone number for Nami. National Alliance of mental instant National Alliance of Mental Health Institute, something of that and on my bookshelf, like it's here's the Here's how Judaism and depression looks right. Like I make it very obvious. And then when I talk in my classes and my sermons, I totally talk about it. Right? My sermons at least once a year or during the big holidays, I talk about mental health this year included in this year, I'm using King Solomon. Right? I mean, Zack, right in Jeremiah, I think King Solomon, who wrote the book of Ecclesiastes, he is right, all is futile. You kidding me? Right? Like, all is futility? utter futility. Right? Like there's an entire chapter on how utterly futile all of life is you telling me he's healthy? That is not the sign of a healthy, well rounded person who's saying these things, right? There's existential issues going on. So recognizing that they exist in our tradition, and that we should talk about it right? daska, like, we have to talk about these things. And I think that's the role that science has made that religion can play is allowing people to explore this need of themselves and encouraging them to utilize the best science that exists. To find this way I love the word they can do use equilibrium at a bare minimum, and then hopefully grow from that point. Ian Binns 51:20 But how do we reach those who mean we talk about instant places in the Bible, that based on how we interpret it shows that you don't need to have shame? If you suffer from depression, or you have depression, right? And yet, the Bible is still as we know, with everything, right, the Bible is still used to instill shame on some people. So reaching the individuals who still feel shame because of someone else, telling them the Bible suggests it. And I know I'm majorly paraphrasing, making this easy, or simplifying it, but those are the people that need to be reached. Right? And we need to be helped. Rachael Jackson 52:08 And I think the best that we can do is try to make broad, build those bridges of making that happen. Right, that I'm not the person who would have ever said those things I'm right, that that would never, that would never be my way of thinking. Right? But if I can't reach out, they're not coming to me, perhaps I can reach someone who is talking to them. Right that, that in my way of saying these things, I am opening doors for people to open other doors for other people to come in. Right? That that that's that's our way of reaching people that don't want to be reached also is not through us talking. But it's through the overlap. Got to bring in a Venn diagram sometime today. I can't talk directly to the said person. But perhaps we share a person in common that would then say, hey, look at this, here's an alternative to what you've learned. So I don't know if that? Ian Binns 53:11 Does. That's my first Rachael Jackson 53:12 offensive. Ian Binns 53:14 No, no, no. I think part of the issue we're dealing with here too, though, around mental health, and something that we can address throughout this series is that, you know, if you pull back from the role of the Bible, there's a major stigma in this country around mental health. And I know there are elsewhere but let's just focus on where we are right now. But there's this whole notion that if you have struggle with your mental health in some way that you're not supposed to talk about it, because of the shame associated with that. And then we see the number of military personnel or retirees who you know, it's like 20 or 22, who take their lives every single day. Because they're, you know, taught that and a lot of them are typically men, and they're taught that you know, you're supposed to be a hardened warrior. So you can't talk about these these touchy feely things, and then they end up dead right? We lost that workout group I'm part of that three. I did not know him that well. We met a few times he took his life about a month ago. Because and people were shocked people were like, I have no idea I had no idea is struggling I had no idea that struggling and I didn't know him that well. I'm certain the signs were there but we don't know to look for them if because of the shame he he may have felt but that stereotypically goes with mental health is that that's one of things i've you know, Zack as I've once we met and as we got to know each other, I've always appreciated how on Facebook when you talk about your struggles with depression in your, in your journey with your depression, that you have equated it to things like us. Or arm or something with your heart or something that people tend to talk more freely about than they do if it's something with your brain, right, and that is just another part of your body. So that's that I approach it a lot that way ever since I saw you do that. I thought that made a lot of sense, right? Yeah. And so it's, and we've had many conversations on the show about who is the real me, based on the meal medication or the Minato medication. Zack Jackson 55:30 You know, one of my favorite things about the Bible as a whole. Both the Hebrew and Christian versions is that unlike most ancient texts, it doesn't seek to idealize people. Like, if you if you're Reading about some Babylonian king from the Babylonian texts, you'll read all about how handsome he is, and how muscley he is and how he never loses and how he's God's favorite person, and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. But like you read about King Saul, or David or Solomon or like, like David is lifted up as the greatest King ever. And he's written all these songs, and he's such great guy, but man, the Bible tells you all about all the awful things that he's also not. Right. So like the gospels were written by the or supervised by Jesus's disciples. And so they're the ones writing this book, and they are portrayed as such nincompoops in there. Like, they did not try to sugarcoat themselves, they presented themselves as they are. So you can read this. And you can see yourself in it. And you don't see some idealized version that you can never live up to. You see people who struggle, people who are honest, sometimes up How about what they're feeling, and how they're struggling what they're dealing with. And then you see a God that is still good. And that uses, uses their weakness, as as their strength as their superpower. And that is one of the overarching themes of Scripture, as always been that that's why I have these two scripture verses tattooed on my wrists that the one is from Psalm 33, I believe that he spoken all things came into being and the other ones revelation. At, behold, I'm making all things new, that the beginning and the end of the story of the Christian scriptures anyway, begins with his creation on both ends, that it's taking the old in the broken and making something beautiful with it, like, like a mosaic, and not just shaking up the edges sketch and starting over again, because this one got broken. I love that. And I need that, as somebody who dwells in darkness on the regular. That's actually how I met Rachel, was I said that story about how the Bible begins and ends with creation. And she said, whose Bible? my Bible doesn't end that way. And I was like, this person, this person is going to be my best friend, but it's gonna be great. My life is so much richer, because she's in it. Oh, hey, Rachel, I didn't see you there. Rachael Jackson 58:34 I want to say thank you for taking us down this journey. And for being again, so open and vulnerable with us. Not just the five of us, but anyone who's listening and anyone who feels like we can share this. That we can really share this with others. So please do so right. Even if even if you've never shared an episode or a podcast before with someone, I think having this open conversation about struggles is really important. So please feel free to share this and any other episode. Zack Jackson 59:13 I just want to say one final thing as we as we wrap up that and then to read you a poem that I discovered that the goal as we often see, it is pure bliss, and hope and joy and laughter and all the good things. And we imagine that mental health is some mental illness is something that is keeping us from that pure bliss and only if only we had just the right combination, we would be happy all the time. And we think of hope as something so blessed and wonderful and I want to affirm the grittiness of life and of you the listener and you my fellow hosts and to say that Sometimes life is dirty and the bloody and is still is beautiful. And so I wanted to finish this by Reading a poem by a poet named Caitlin seda. That's called hope is not a bird, Emily, it's a sewer rat. This is directed at Emily Dickinson, who wrote a lovely poem about how hope is this flattering bird that comes in on the wind and I found this one to be much more inspirational. Also, there's a couple of expletives in there. And so, if you're listening, and you're a child, maybe plug your ears. Also, if you're a child, you're a super cool kid for listening to this podcast so good on you. Okay. Adam Pryor 1:00:48 And probably you don't need to plug your ears at this point. Zack Jackson 1:00:54 Hope is not the thing with feathers that comes home to roost when you need it most. Hope is an ugly thing. With teeth and claws and patchy fur that seems some shit. It's what thrives in the discards and survives in the ugliest parts of our world, able to find a way to go on when nothing else can even find a way in. It's the gritty, nasty little carrier of such diseases as optimism, persistence, perseverance, and joy. transmissible as it drags its tail across your path and bites you in the ass. Hope is not some delicate, beautiful bird, Emily. It is a lowly sewer rat. That snorts pesticides, like there were lines of coke, and still shows up on time to work the next day, looking no worse for the wear, Kendra Holt-Moore 1:01:52 huh. Now I want to cross stitch of that monster, that monster Adam Pryor 1:02:03 feels like one that could go in my office. snore snorts lines of coke and shows up for work the next day, who's pull that right. Rachael Jackson 1:02:28 And on a different note, we have decided this year, year three of our podcast at the end of every episode, each one of us is going to share something. And one of the things that I Rachel love to share our stories from my tradition. And so I hope that you enjoy this story this week. And next week, we are going to be so excited to hear from one of the other hosts and each week, we will rotate what our story is. Sometimes it will be connected to what we are talking about. And sometimes it won't. So stay tuned for the end of every episode and let us know what you think. Today I wanted to share a story with you about prayer. And just a note about many Jewish Oh folktales whatever, they always have men as the primary. So if you've heard this story, I'm just gonna change the gender because I don't think men get up all the fun. So just putting that one out there. So once upon a time, no, not really. One day. There is a farmer in the field. And she is tilling away. And she's working really hard because every farmer I've ever met works really hard sunup sundown 365. incredibly hard work. And this person, because she is a farmer, she doesn't have time to study. She doesn't have time to pray. She doesn't have time to be a learned scholar. She does the best she can. She prays to God, whenever she needs to, in whatever way she feels she can one day or very learned scholar comes along, is driving his carriage and he stops and he sees her praying in the fields and he says, What are you doing? And she says, I'm praying. And he responds, you can't pray right now it is not the time for prayer here. Let me teach you. And she says, okay, I've always wanted to be a good Jew. I've always wanted to be a good pray er, and so she agrees. And this very learned scholar comes and lives with her and in the house. And every day for six months. He teaches her When to pray, what words to pray, how to pray exactly the right things, to do the choreography, when to bow, when to shuffle all this stuff when she learns it, because she's a great student. And then he says, Thank you for giving me this opportunity to teach you the right way to pray. And then he moves on. And he leaves the house, and she is still a farmer, tilling the soil every day harvesting and reaping when necessary. And day after day, she slowly forgets she forgets, is it two steps forward? Or three steps forward? And then how many steps back Do I have to take? And do I go left first or right first, I don't know which way to bow. And she starts getting confused. And she starts getting upset because she knows she's doing it wrong. And so she stops praying. And she no longer goes out into the field and says the prayer of her heart. She no longer prays when she's moved to. And that's how she lives her life. And the learned scholar dies. And he goes up and he meets God. And God says, What did you do? to this farmer, he went, God, I taught her. She was such a good student. She learned she learned all the prayers. And after six months, I felt my job was done. And I moved on. He said, I thought I was doing exactly what you God would have wanted me to do. And God responds, how dare you? How dare you. She has not prayed a day since you told her that she did it wrong. She was my best prayer every day, she would pray to me. And she poured out her heart to me. But you came along and told her she did it wrong. And now she hasn't prayed. That is not your role. How dare you. What we learned from this is even if we have all the rights and the rituals, the smells, and the bells and the choreography, there is no right or wrong. The best prayers are the ones that are genuine, whether they be written down, or whether they be in our hearts, whether they be a prescribed times, or it's spontaneous ones. The ones that affect us are the ones that we feel there is no wrong way to pray. Zack Jackson 1:07:49 This has been Episode 90 of the down the wormhole podcast. If you enjoy this podcast would you do us a favor and share it with your friends. That's a simple way that you can help our third year to be our best year yet. Thanks also to our Patreon supporters for helping us to make this podcast happen. If you'd like to donate to the cause, you can find us@patreon.com slash down the wormhole podcast. We'll be back in two weeks as Ian helps us to understand the science and spirituality of anxiety and how mindfulness meditation has helped him to persevere. We'll see you then.
We're back with new episodes starting next week, but in the meantime, we want to make sure that you are all aware of the incredible science and religion symposium that is happening this weekend at Palmer Seminary. Zack has put a lot of time and energy into making sure that this is an event that is worth your time. Check out the website to register for in-person or online space. It will be recorded and available after the fact as well, but make sure that you register to get the link! https://www.palmerseminary.edu/science
While we are hard at work on the next season, we are re-releasing some of our favorite episodes. Way back at the beginning of this awful pandemic when everyone was stuck inside binging on Netflix, we did a series on some of our favorite movies. This episode was simultaneously spiritually uplifting, raucously funny, and somewhat NSFW (depending on your tolerance for eyeball hooks and heavenly orgies). If you haven't seen Star Trek: Generations, make sure you watch it before listening or else much of this will make no sense! Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
While we are hard at work on the next season, we are re-releasing some of our favorite episodes. This one was our fifth episode way back on September 4th 2019. When we recorded this, we had no idea how the battle for scientific and religious authority would devolve into a battle for our very lives. Should we trust the institutions that created these vaccines? Should we trust our religious leaders who claim to speak for God? Should we trust what the internet has to say about health when we can't even trust it to tell us the truth about the hit 90's cartoon, Street Sharks? Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ Produced by Zack Jackson Music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis PS - Zack's audio did not record properly, so we had to use the backup recording which is why it sounds so bad compared to the others. Show Notes: Street Sharks and the problem with history: https://www.geek.com/tech/how-i-used-lies-about-a-cartoon-to-prove-history-is-meaningless-on-the-internet-1656188/ The definitive guide to the Denver Airport conspiracy: https://www.denverpost.com/2016/10/31/definitive-guide-to-denver-international-airport-conspiracy-theories/ Hawaii Telescope Project, Long Disputed, Will Begin Construction: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/10/science/hawaii-telescope-tmt-mauna-kea.html The Oven of Akhnai: https://www.sefaria.org/Bava_Metzia.59b.1?ven=William_Davidson_Edition_-_English&lang=bi Note from Zack: After editing the past few episodes, I realized that I've mentioned Thomas Paine at least five or six thousand times. This is because I just finished a massive biography on him, and have had no one to process it with. I do apologize and will henceforth make every effort to diversify my 18th/19th century pop culture references in future episodes. I will leave you with this gem from the October 1783 edition of The Onion... https://www.theonion.com/historical-archives-i-cannot-help-that-women-are-oft-a-1819584502
While we are hard at work on the next season, we are re-releasing some of our favorite episodes. This one originally aired on January 15th, 2020. ------------ Our Human Origins miniseries keeps rolling as we explore the implications of art, social structures, and burials among Neanderthals and early Homo Sapiens in the Stone Age (specifically about 65,000 BCE to 10,000 BCE). How much can we infer from the clues they left behind? What of the small idols that predate all known religions by 15,000 years? Was God speaking to early humans like God speaks today? Are we making too much out of too little? Why does spirituality always seem to pop up whenever humans are around? Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
While we get the next season of DtW ready, we are re-releasing some of our favorite episodes. This one was especially fun. This episode originally aired on June 16th 2020 -------------- We are thrilled to welcome Dr Scott Sampson to the DtW podcast! Those of you with small children probably know him best as Dr Scott the Paleontologist from Dinosaur Train, but there is so much more to him than time traveling cartoon dinosaurs! In his book, "How to Raise a Wild Child", he explains how he left his dream job in academia and devoted his life to spreading the love of science and nature to the next generation, because unless we become a people who love and understand our world, we're doomed. We get into some of the teaching strategies that he has developed to help all of you parents who suddenly became home-school teachers, as well as practical ways to grow emotionally, mentally, and spiritually. He casts a vision in which humankind rediscovers their love of the natural world, develops technology in tandem with it, and becomes a force for good for the sake of all living things. All that to say, it's no accident that the answers to life, the universe, and everything are contained within episode 42. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis
Episode 89 Despite the fact that all living things die, most people refuse to talk about it until it directly affects them. That's too bad, because planning for death can make living so much more vibrant. In this episode, we talk about physician assisted dying, guerilla funerals, the importance of ritual, and the nature of life itself. Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are Adam Pryor 00:15 My name is Adam Pryor. I work at Bethany College in Lindsborg Kansas. I hope that when I die, someone will put me in the mushroom burial suit invented by Jim Ray Lee Ian Binns 00:27 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte. And see I would be cremated and put into the hilt of the first real lightsaber. Rachael Jackson 00:41 Rachael Jackson Agoudas, Israel congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina, and after I die, I want a traditional Jewish burial. So buried in some sort of decomposing box, I don't really care if it's pine or cardboard. And, yeah, just to be buried in the ground, nothing just simple. Zack Jackson 01:06 Zack Jackson, UCC pastor and Reading Pennsylvania, and when I die, I want to be composted. Rachael Jackson 01:13 Kendra Holt-Moore, PhD candidate at Boston University, and when I die, I want half of my body to be pressed into a gemstone that will become an heirloom of my family. And the other half of my body will be buried in one of those tree pods that grows into a forest. I can't remember the name of the person who invented these tree pods. But it's a similar idea, I think, to the mushroom suit, but you become a forest of death. Adam Pryor 01:44 That is oddly specific. Zack Jackson 01:48 Yeah, yeah. It's a wonderful story in Greek mythology about that, Ian Binns 01:52 with the force of a point out that all of you all y'all came up with something? Like somewhat reasonable. I mean, I just wanted to play. How cool would that be, instead of being like, displayed on someone's, you know, mantle in a box, or an urn that can be displayed as a lightsaber hilt? Zack Jackson 02:14 There you go. Or I can just give my carbon back to the earth that sustained me. Yeah, see, I Ian Binns 02:20 mean, that's probably what will happen. But I wanted to fantasize Adam Pryor 02:23 I'm hung up on the gemstones. Ian Binns 02:26 Okay. Kendrick, Tell us. Tell us about Zack Jackson 02:29 death. And which, which half of you is going to be a gemstone I want? I'll leave that up to 02:36 the left half. Adam Pryor 02:37 Is it like? Like, certain parts? Are you? The person chopping you up? I thought they would like, without the ashes. That's not what I envisioned no harm. And how about foot? Zack Jackson 02:59 That's absolutely the way this has to go. Now. It's like, Don't cremate and turn you into a diamond. Let's just take like your arms or legs and squish them. Ian Binns 03:08 Yeah, let's just squeeze them all together. You're going to create a gemstone, Kendra Holt-Moore 03:12 whichever parts would make the best gems. 03:22 Oh, yeah. I guess Rachael Jackson 03:28 it's as good as it's gonna get. Um, yeah, so we're talking about death today. And there's so much that we could talk about. So let me just say that. I think that death is a pretty fun subject to talk about, mostly because a lot of my own work is about at least implicitly. So it's just so a lot of the stuff that I do comes out of this social psychological theory called terror management theory. And that's terror. Not what people often Yeah, terror. Some people hear me say that and they think I am saying Tara, marriage management theory or like Tarot management theory. But no, it's terror. t e r, r o r, like, you're terrified. Ian Binns 04:19 I do like to Taro. Sounds kind of cool. Rachael Jackson 04:24 Yeah, that's a different thing. But terror management theory is a theory that was first proposed in the 80s by a social psychologist, and the whole there's, there's a lot that has been done over the last several decades on it. But the basic idea is that when people are primed to think about death, or they're exposed to some kind of trigger that causes them to reflect on death, and there are explicit and implicit ways of doing this, but basically, these Death triggers or what they would call mortality salience triggers. And they they make us more defensive. And these defense mechanisms can look a lot of different ways. But the basic idea is that like, people don't want to die, whether we're talking about physical death, or even like, a more like metaphorical figurative kind of death. So think, you know, apart from dying in your body, maybe you're also another kind of death would be like, total social isolation and exclusion, that's the kind of like social death. So there's something that is not, we're not just talking about, like physical death, even though that's a huge part of it. But also, you know, a kind of ego death, if you will, where, what it means to be human, the connectedness we feel in community, like there are ways of dying, that disconnect us from those pieces of what it means to be human as well. So anyway, terror management theory is something that touches on all these different kinds of death, and shows how people become more defensive of the things that are meaningful to them, or the things that make us feel like we have a purpose and a sense of significance in the world. And when we don't have those things, those ties of significance, those like foundational building blocks of meaning and community and purpose, that we are a lot more vulnerable to, like psychological dysfunction, and other forms of dysfunction and even death. And so there's, you know, all kinds of ways of, of testing this, but just to give like, one example of what this means is, there was a study years ago, where a group of researchers, they, they took a group of Christians, and they divided the Christians and half and half of the Christians were exposed to some kind of mortality salience, or like death trigger. And usually, that's a couple of questions where you're being asked explicitly to reflect on what you think about death, like what you think will happen to your body when you die, stuff like that. And then the other half of the Christians, were not asked those questions. And then all of the Christians were brought back together and given a series of questionnaires in which they were asked to evaluate an out group, in this case that outgroup was another separate group of Jewish people. And what they found was that the Christian group who had been exposed to the mortality salience trigger, that they had a slightly harsher evaluations against the the Jewish group, than the the half of the Christians that were not exposed to a death trigger. And so this is like, first of all, just say, this has nothing to do with like, like, implicit, like, inherently being like Christian or Jewish, like you could have put in like, Canadian American, like any kind of like identifier. But this goes to show that, like, religion is often a very, like salient and important and strong form of identification for people. But what this showed was that, you know, whenever we're threatened in some way, with these, like ideas of data that we really, we want to like, strengthen our in group markers, and we become a little bit more suspicious of ideas or people or communities that are different from us, or that threaten what we see as like the nature of the universe, the order of the cosmos. And so this is just like one example and hundreds of studies that have been done at this point that that show this idea, and like I said, you could do this with a number of things, but I chose the, the religious example because of, well, what are conversations usually turned to so the point though, is just to say, like, we, as people, we think about death a lot, and we a lot of what we do in our lives, we're trying to like, make, you know, make meaning and like find a sense of belonging in the world, and that death is just like part of being human. And it's something that at some point, we will have to think about more explicitly, and have to really reckon with and so that is just like some background I guess, into like, why this this last episode. In our What is the serious medical ethics? Is that loosely That is correct. But yeah, just to give a little background unto like, how to like orient to this conversation about like the nature of death, the concept of death and how it how it can be a really powerful motivator of, of human behavior. And so, yeah, I guess, like one of the, one of the stories that I was thinking about, and this is sort of transitioning to a slightly different direction than what I was just talking about, but I was thinking a lot about the Death with Dignity movement, this week. And that, for those who don't know, like, there's a lot of, I think, every year, there's still like, ongoing discussion and debate about how this looks in policy. But the state of Oregon was the first state to implement a policy, I can't remember the year, if anyone knows that off the top of their, their head, for Feel free to say, but we can find that later. But they, Oregon was the first state to implement a policy in which people who were terminally ill were are able to ask for a lethal dose of medication to end their lives, so that they don't have to suffer. And that they, you know, the The purpose of this policy was to give terminally ill patients a sense of control, and a sense of, you know, dignity and normalcy in their last days with family. And so the, the story that I had read long ago was a woman named Brittany Maynard, or main art, I'm not sure exactly how to say her name, but she, she died by this voluntary lethal dose of medication on, I think, in 2014. But before that, she had been diagnosed with an aggressive brain cancer, and she was 29. And she and her husband, you know, they were young, and there, they knew that there was nothing that was going to save her. And brain cancer is, you know, just, it's a, like a horrifying thing to go through, and would lead to a lot of suffering and a lot of deterioration in her body and in her, like, mental capability and personality, and she didn't want her family to have to watch her suffer that way. And she didn't want to, sorry, my mind's going on here. And she had didn't want to suffer that way. And so she and her husband established residency in Oregon, so that she could participate in the death with dignity. Act. And so anyway, this, this has led to a lot of conversations, and in a lot of different like religious communities and, and medical communities about like, what this means, like, what are the implications of something like this? And this is just like one example in, in medicine have like, conversations about death. Like, there are other things that, you know, we could talk about, like, defining what death even is, because that has changed over the years as well. But I was thinking a lot about this conversation, because there's something that seems almost like paradoxical I guess about it, you know, and I think that's part of what the controversy brings out is, we feel like, you know, especially many people from religious communities who say, well, all life is sacred, and we should, you know, stand by the sanctity of human life and things like that. And so how does something like the Death with Dignity act, violate that principle, or even, you know, uphold it? And, and so, I just wanted to, like, make that our example and to maybe see, especially like, the clergy in the room, what if, what this has looked like in your communities, if this is something that you've come across, and how that conversation has, has played out? Because when I think about it, I, I think a lot about how, you know, and in, you know, like my academic work, what it means to look at something like the death of dignity, like assisted suicide issue and how that is a way of, like fighting death, or, like, Is it a way of fighting death or giving into death? I think that's sort of the Controversy here and that there's like, a lot of different ways to sort of analyze and interpret what this very personal decision actually means. And it's just so interesting because you, you can, you can really understand it, I think from several different angles, that it, it's like a fight against the suffering and the humiliation that the dying process can bring. So that you, you know, maybe like, remain in your friends and family's memories as a vital, like healthy person. Whereas other people see it as like maybe as a kind of giving up. And it's just like, so it's such a personal issue. And so, so yeah, that's, that's what I wanted to just sort of set on the table to get us get us going. 16:02 These are really great things that you're talking about Kendra. And I will say that I have taught about dignity and death from a Jewish perspective. And I want to throw in a couple couple, you post a couple of dichotomies. And I think there's far more there, there's several others dichotomies as well. And so just want to look at that, when we think about death, dignity in dying, right, which is a better terminology than physician assisted suicide. Right, we're giving somebody dignity? Well, we asked, we have to ask ourselves the questions that in the last 100 years, we have progressed and our medical intervention in such incredible ways that we prolong people's lives. Right, I mean, that's vaccines, antibiotics, surgery, right, just simple things like that, that have prolonged people's life. So from from my perspective, there's really this question of our way of prolonging suffering and the suffering part of life and what part of it right so those those pieces and I, I feel I have to live into the roles that I have set up for myself, and I want to share a story. If that is okay, this comes from comes from Tom but of course, because that's where I like to quote a lot of and everyone wants the full full citation Babylonian Talmud traffic to boat page 104 eight. And this, this will lead into part of the conversation that I was thinking. I made servants of Rabbi Yehuda hanasi went through the roof and said, the upper realms are requesting the presence of Rabbi Yehuda hanasi. And the lower realms are requesting the presence of Rabbi Yehuda hanasi. May it be the will of God that the lower world should impose their will upon the upper worlds. However, when she saw how many times he would enter the bathroom, remove his phylacteries exit, put them back on and how he was suffering so with his intestinal disease, she said, may it be the will of God that the upper world should impose their will upon the lower worlds, and the sages, meanwhile, would not be silent, meaning they would not refrain from begging for mercy so that Rabbi Yehuda hanasi would not die. So she took a jug through it from the roof to the ground. And due to the sudden noise, the sages were momentarily silent and refrain from their begging of mercy. And at that moment, Rabbi Yehuda hanasi died. So we use this and modernity we use this story to say, Who are we doing this for? Who are we prolonging the life and therefore the suffering for? Is it because we can't bear to let this person die? Or is it because that's what is necessary? So that's, that's one way we use this story. The second way we use this understanding is from an ethical standpoint. medical ethics has this idea of personal autonomy, resources, my use of adequate resources and do no harm non maleficence. If a person is clearly suffering, is it not the job of the physician to do no harm? Right? So we really ask we really have to under Stand are we causing harm by allowing someone to live? So having said that, a couple of case questions that I was thinking about, if there is a person who has, you know, the example that Kendra gave, right? So this woman has a brain tumor. Let's say she now develops completely Incidentally, just randomly has nothing to do with the brain tumor, she develops severe bronchitis that turns into aspirational pneumonia. Right? Do you treat the pneumonia? Not rhetorical. Do you treat the pneumonia? Not we're not again, we're not touching the brain. We're not doing anything, do you treat pneumonia? Ian Binns 20:50 I would still defer to the patient's wishes. I said, if the patient says, Hey, I don't want you to treat my pneumonia, and then argue against that? Well, probably, especially if I've made the decision that I'm going to continue on with my life as long as I possibly can until the cancer finally gets me, then yeah, I would treat it Zack Jackson 21:20 as a doctor, you do what the patient wants. But if it were me, I don't know if I would, I might see that as a grace. Pender Adam, Rachael Jackson 21:33 I guess it depends how much time I thought I had left. But I'm inclined to answer I guess similarly to to Zack, that maybe I would if I, if I still had like a good bit of quality of life left. So yeah, I guess I would lean more towards Yes. Adam Pryor 21:57 I don't have enough information to decide. No, I do like information you have. So no, like. So like, what I think about are the answer I might give to that question look very different when I am 29 versus 39 versus 49. versus 59. It looks really different depending on what my familial situation looks like. And to me, it also looks really different based on the this specific type of brain cancer and its prognosis. So there's, there's a spectrum of I might answer yes or no. 22:44 could go either way. What about you, Rachel? Either way, if I were the patient, in this case, I would not treat the pneumonia. Ian Binns 22:55 Can you explain why? 22:57 Yeah. If I know I'm going to die soon, right? We're all going to die. But if I know that I'm going to die, and it's going to be a terrible dying experience. I wouldn't want to leave that for anyone including myself. Pneumonia is considered old man's friend. Right? Zack Jackson 23:19 Right. That's why I mentioned it. I see it as a grace. Yeah, but I would still want it. Not to be cured. But I feel like I would want some kind of comfort, at least in it. Recently drowning 23:33 you aren't? Yeah, you I mean, that's the difference, right? You can cure most people. I shouldn't say most times, pneumonia has the ability to be cured. Right. It's not an automatic death sentence if you get pneumonia, but there are plenty of symptom relief things that you can also take, you know, also just like, have enough morphine that you don't care for feel any of it. I bring this up because there are real life examples. Right there real life, right? There's a there's a response that that we look at responses, the Jewish way of saying, Hey, I have this question that doesn't actually have an answer. Hey, rabbis, can you give me an answer, where it talks about a 95 year old woman who has Alzheimer's, severe, severe Alzheimer's? And they compare that to a 16 month old who has severe cannabis disease? Right, both of them will die within the year. What do you do with them? Does their happiness matter does how long they live matter? What matters when we make these decisions? And who is making these decisions? Right in the case that Kendra provided for the death and dignity, the patient themselves is making the call. Oftentimes, when we are faced with questions like this, the patient themselves is not the one capable of making that call, for one reason or another again, in terms of the death, they did In Oregon and Washington, Oregon, I just looked at my notes that was 97. Washington was oh nine. So both those two states habit, and in those cases, the patient themselves must be the one it cannot be a guardian. And there's lots of doctors involved and psychologists and it has to be a hospice situation of six months or less verified by multiple doctors. I mean, it's really above board. This is not the 1990s Kevorkian questions, which is a different question entirely. But I know that that's clouded. Those of us that remember those years very differently than these laws in Washington and Oregon, Washington State and Oregon? Um, I think it's, I think it's all of those pieces. And then when we look at the question of what are we doing for prolonging life, if someone you know, what is death? And I so let me just answer that real quickly. I know I'm jumping all around. And for our listeners, I apologize that I'm just sort of chunking my statements here, I unfortunately will have will have to exit and leave this wonderful conversation. So I just want to put in a couple more thoughts. Zack Jackson 26:08 Without Rachel, it's gonna turn dark, 26:10 it's gonna get dark, it might turn it gets dark. So I'll have to listen to your statements when they come out, then. 26:22 Um, what what do we classify as death A long time ago, it was when you stopped breathing, and then it became when you stopped having a heartbeat. And then it's when your brain ceases to have brainwaves. Right. And that's where that's where we're at now, is brainwave death. So if your heart is still beating, your body is technically living alive. But your brain is not and cannot be, we don't have a way to resurrect that. So what do we understand death to be. And this is where I see hope in our society. This is where I'm hoping we will get to go that rather than asking these questions of being that we're removing the sanctity of life, we're redefining what life can be. So here's the optimism that you're just going to have to hold on to for just a little bit, because I can't, I can't end the episode this way, because I'm not going to be there. But it's optimism that rather than being afraid of death, which is what so much of our society is dealing with. And as a clergy person facing one's mortality is a question that we face a lot. And I know other third year the same way, and recognizing that, you know, bring on the Lion King, it's the circle of life, it's the circle of life where we're really looking at life, and that death is just a part of that. So getting down and drilling down, what are the things that we're afraid of, and it's, it's often a fear of difficulty and dying, or it's often a fear of an afterlife for some people. So that's not which it's not just death that we're afraid of, in our society with all these medical techniques, we have the ability to, to say, Okay, now we have the control. Right, we have the ability to Yeah, how are we using that control? How are we taking ownership of ourselves and our life, which includes this portion of? 28:27 So that's all for me. 28:33 Good luck. Zack Jackson 28:55 I'll jump on the religious aspect, because the United Church of Christ actually has made Yeah, you have statements about this topic? Because of course, we have Ian Binns 29:09 a lot of topics. That's not a complaint. Zack Jackson 29:15 No. And you know why we do that is because the United Church of Christ is a congregational denomination, which means that the national setting has no power to enforce anything on local churches. So when we get together every other year for General Synod and we make these grand statements of, of witness and whatnot, there's no actual accountability that has to come with that. We can just say these things and then send it to a committee to make a study on it and send out materials to churches. And so unlike other denominations, where when they say something, they actually have to do something about it, we can just say a lot of things. So that's kind of nice, but we did in 2007 have For a resolution on the sea, the resolution was called legalization of physician aid in dying. And as a result of that, they, they voted in to affirm this, which sent it to a committee to do research on the topic and to create a six week study guide for small groups and churches. It was designed to be used during Lent, which is the time in which traditionally, we imagine ourselves in the tomb with Christ. And looking forward to resurrection. And so it's very theologically focused. I will put a link in, in in the show notes. But, you know, one of the things that it really focuses on is that Christians should not be afraid of death, death, and resurrection is kind of our thing. Like, it's, it's an important part of the Christian tradition and story. And so if we believe that death is not a final thing, but a transition into something else, then how one's life ends, his lesson is not all that important. And so whether that person dies by natural causes or dies, in physician assisted ways, the it is still a transition into into what is next. And we believe that people are more than just their physical bodies. And so keeping a physical body alive is not inherently more virtuous than allowing a physical body to die. And so we came down on the side of supporting, but also in an informed way. Rachael Jackson 31:58 Zach, just to get out of like a clarifying question, maybe, because I think what a lot of what we've been talking about is, you know, the policies and statements that are for this kind of, you know, choice in deliberating like how someone wants to die, but just in case, there's any confusion for people who didn't like grow up in, in a community where there was a lot of opposition to this. I just wanted to, like, put out there some of the ways that people have been thinking about, like, aid and dying, and, and I personally didn't grow up with a ton of conversation around this. So I'll just say, like, from, from what I understand, like some of the verses, I guess, that were, that could be used to, like, deny someone the ability to have, like their own, like authority in determining when they could die if they were terminally ill, or versus, like one in or several, I guess, in the New Testament, but I'll just read one, which is in First Corinthians 316 through 17. And it says, Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you, if anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him, for God's temple is holy, and you are that temple. And so it's like, versus like that, that I have these vague memories of people sort of using that as like, the theological argument of like, Well, someone shouldn't have should, someone shouldn't be able to make the decision to die before their time. Because, you know, like, the idea that your body is not your own, and that you just have to, like live until, like, God decides that it's not your time anymore. And so that's, that's, that's my memory of like that how that discussion went, but I like it. What else is there Zack? I feel like you probably have more like experiences and memories of how people have maybe argued this does that sound pretty? Pretty right to you? It does. Zack Jackson 34:27 I was taught as a kid that taking any human life is a sin. And so taking your own human life is a sin. And because you took the life and then died with that sin, having not the opportunity to repent from it, then anyone who took their own life whether in this setting or in you know any other way would end up in hell was what I was taught in no uncertain terms. Yeah, which I think I've mentioned in a previous episode before, that my mom's explanation to me was that anyone who takes their own life, their brain typically has some issues going on. And God would see that in the same way that God would see the brain of someone with down syndrome who doesn't have the mental capacity to understand the ancient Creed's or, like, something like that. And it's also, as I reflect back now, I think about how those same people who would tell me that taking a life is a sin. Also found ways of getting around it when it was the death penalty or war. They found ways of theologically explaining those things, but not typically suicide, whether physician assisted or otherwise, or abortion, those were the two that were like, there's no way around that. But war and death penalty, they often found theological ways around it. And that's usually what we do, isn't it? when we, when our worldview supports something, we find a way of making our theology support it. Ian Binns 36:15 So we cherry pick? Yeah, this this part supports my my conclusion. So I'm going to love this part, even if many other parts don't support it, I'll ignore this. Yeah, and I think that Rachael Jackson 36:30 what you just said back to like that, that also resonates are I remember, some of my, like early conversations, saying that exact thing like about people going to hell when they make that decision. And I think what is what was always absent from those conversations, though, those like theological interpretations, it seemed like there was a conflation of all the circumstances in which someone might choose to, like, take their life. And obviously, it's like a super sensitive subject and really complicated, but I think that, like, a lot of what we've been talking about here, right now is, you know, the idea that, like, we're talking about a reduction in suffering, or like the attempt to reduce suffering and, like, focus on like, quality of life, rather than quantity of life. Which, you know, still still tricky, still controversial, but that that's really, I think, the core of what people are are thinking about when they like support something like the Death with Dignity act, and it's, it's, I think it does in in a lot of cases come down to are you are you emphasizing quality, or quantity? And it's not always easy to like separate those things out but that's where I see the difference and maybe like the the core of some of the disagreements about like whether this is a good thing. Zack Jackson 38:11 I think I would be really interested in hearing different points of view based on profession. Yeah. Cuz I think a couple of years ago, this whole topic would have made me very uncomfortable. But I'm death is just such a part of my life. As a pastor of a primarily older congregation. All all day, all week all year, I'm, I'm with the dead and the dying and it has lost its staying. death itself is no longer something that really terrifies me. It's it's become this kind of more beautiful part of being alive. This transition that it's hard to explain, because then it makes you sound callous, and a little dead inside. But I think it's one of the most beautiful experiences when I can be present with someone at the end of their life. It is this holy and sacred thin space when somebody is breathing their last breaths. So I'm not afraid of it anymore. You know? Plus, I live with a pastor who used to be a hospice chaplain. So like, we talk about death around the dining room table. Rachael Jackson 39:34 Just your everyday dinner conversation. Zack Jackson 39:38 Yeah, so I almost kind of like the idea of getting to choose when you go because then you're not, then you're not worrying about the process of dying. Adam. Oh, Adam Pryor 39:51 Zach, what you mean like death became a part of life. You said that, which is only interesting to me because Rachel said it too. Is that? Yeah, exactly. That's exactly what I'm after. Zack Jackson 40:07 All right, so. So I did a CPE, which is clinical pastoral education at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia. And my very first day, I was training with one of the chaplains, I walked into a room, because she had given called in, and the woman had died. Just maybe 15 minutes before we got there. And I didn't know that. And I'm standing in the room, and somebody mentions that she's dead. And I looked over at this person laying there that could have just been sleeping. But then suddenly, I was aware that this person had died. And I felt so weird. And I felt so creepy because this person wasn't prepared and dressed up and you know, the whole, like, Oh, they look just like they're, they look so good. The way you do it a viewing. This is a person that was still hooked up to machines and looked pretty bad, and was dead. And it was horrifying. And there's a certain smell that comes with death. And I thought about that for days and weeks. And then I just kept going and doing it. And as a chaplain being called when people were at the end, and sitting down with people, and you kind of I don't know, you do a scary thing a couple of times, and you get through it, and it's not as scary. And then once you're less afraid, you start to notice the more holy aspects of it. You know, for example, when a person is dying, and they know that they're dying, and they have disavowed themselves have the this mythology that they will live forever, and they know that the end is near, do you know the kinds of conversations you can have with a person in that state? They are the most honest conversations that that person has ever had in their life. And to be able to just speak openly about like, what do you think it's gonna be like, later on? Today? Maybe even? What do you think? those spaces, those conversations, it's almost like talking with an astronaut before they they go off into the great expanse, you know, you're, you're about to go see something that I'm not gonna see for a long time. And I want to talk with you about how you're feeling about it. And so I do this, and I've done this for years. And yeah, this is why most pastors were telling me they prefer funerals to weddings. There's less drama, and there's way more honesty, and it's a much more sacred and holy place that, that thin space at the end of life. Adam Pryor 42:51 So I mean, I'm kind of sad, Rachel is not here, because I think it's like, probably the like place where like, we were gonna line up more than she would want to give credit for. I mean, I'll still still poke at her. But especially cuz she's not here to defend herself. But I'm an academic, that's what we do. So what I'm thinking about Zach is like, I think this language that both you and Rachel use, I think it comes from a very, like, pastoral. I mean, that in the broad sense, right, a sense of care place, to delimit to expose a place of scientific overreach, I don't think is like what we would describe it as doing, but I think it's implicitly what, what's happening, right? Which is, in a sciency way, right? Life is not dead. How do you define life? It's the persistence of not dying. Right? And if life is taken as that it's terrifying to die. But that's a very, I think, particularly in the 20th 21st century, right? Like, that's a very scientific way of getting at this right. It's this sense of saying, science has described for me, the ways in which something is living. Right, called biology. And, and what I think like, what I think is interesting, is that the pastoral approach that I think both you and Rachel want to take, wants to put the brakes on that for a second and say, hold up. what we think of as living might not line up directly with a definition Have the mechanics of a body or thing, trying to continually self perpetuate itself. And, on the one hand those sound like, like, Okay, so that's how religion is going to do this. And on the other hand, there are these sciency things that you can do, which are great. And, you know, sometimes great, and sometimes we should use them. And sometimes we shouldn't, but, but I think what, what I would push on is that, I think how we decide when to use and when not to use those medical and scientific interventions, lines up with, not how we think about death. But how we've defined life. Like, by bringing death into a part of life, right, you've reframed the conversation in a way that you can't, in the scientific context, because for somebody to be dead, be fundamentally not to be alive. Right, whereas that binary gets broken down. If you make death part of life. Zack Jackson 46:27 at its best, one of the things that religion is supposed to do is to suppress the ego. And a person. Religion is a way of connecting a person to something larger than themselves. And one of the ways that my personal religion my faith does that is through knowing how interconnected that I am, that I mean, in my faith, I'll call that the Holy Spirit. I will also from my, you know, scientifically, I'll talk talk about the the atoms and molecules in my body, that are constantly being introduced and sent back out and you know, re forming and fighting back against entropy in order to create this thing. But that, you know, stars exploded A long time ago. And those those star pieces made this, and they made countless other living creatures before me, and they will make so many more after me. And so the me I see as a we, I don't, I'm not so worried about the death of my ego, because my religion has helped me to kill most of it anyway. And so, you know, people talk about having leaving a legacy, how will people remember me? How will I be remembered, they build these pyramids in the desert, because they want to be remembered, the ego has to live on well afterwards, which completely misses the entire point of the interconnectedness of the universe, and just the miracle of life, you know, Carl Sagan said that we are a way for the universe to know itself. And I love that I think that's has such, so spiritually profound. Those, those atoms that were created in those supernova are now able to know themselves because of this brief instance that we call Zack Jackson. And I love that, and I, so I think of death. And this is why I said at the beginning, that when I die, I want to be composted. Because I, when you cremate someone, you'll lose a lot of a lot of that organic material to the combustion. When you bury someone in a, like, traditionally, you know, you don't give back and I want 100% of, of what I am to go back, because I want it to live on as it lived on before me. Rachael Jackson 49:13 And when you're pressed into a gemstone, similarly, you also live on Zack Jackson 49:19 100%. I mean, Adam Pryor 49:24 I think I mean, there's no segue from pressing people's bodies into gemstones that I can that I can make. I so yeah. I I'm also thinking about the question that Rachel asked Dan. And like, where that falls into this and like how I would think about it, and to not give the like snarky I need more information answer. Like Well, I I'm gonna stick with my snarky, like, I need more information, but not in the like, not in the sense of like, Okay. In an almost snarky or sense, don't worry, I'm gonna go, I'm gonna go deeper, which is to say like, even if you gave me the information, okay, I don't know if I could answer the question one for anyone but myself. And two. For me this sort of like I, I'm very sympathetic to this idea that that like death is part of life right to overcome that dichotomy, right and that it has this, that making that movement and using religious traditions to make that movement de centers as in really, really important ways. So, I am 100%, on board there, it still leaves me with a big, long polling question, right, which is almost I think, harder, which is then to say, like, we will, but then how do you define that living thing? Like, how do you find that living thing that can be subject to death? And now, it's not just living by being a proxy of not being dead? Like, that's the question that that for me, comes immediately after the very pastoral movement that I heard you and Rachel making. And I mean, I think it's exciting because I don't think there are great answers to it. But also, I would take a stab at answering it, which is, I think what makes Rachel's predicament so difficult to deal with. So, I, I would play a language game, unsurprisingly. Right. Which is to say that we when we when we say something is living, or what it means to live, right, we can meet it in two senses, grammatically, and in transitive and a transitive sense. So we can mean it as something is alive. Right? as a state of situation, or we can mean it as the experience of living. Right? So that it's this this lived experience that one has not a state of being something, right. So it has these two senses when we use it. And for me, I think it's getting in to and being cognizant and about that sense of the lived experience, that's really important. Can I identify a set of experiences that living stuff house, that's essential to how I would think about whether or not I'm not actually ending my life is that 29 year old with the brain tumor who now has pneumonia. But as the 29 year old with a brain tumor, who's now got pneumonia, was I already dead? Because I had ceased to do the things by which I would constitute having living experience. So I'm not actually dying. And doing that no one's assisting me in dying, I was already dead. Even everybody that looks around me says, aha, you're alive because you have a heartbeat, or brain function, or this or that other thing. I mean, don't get me wrong, I know this goes down like a, an ethical, good. gray area might not be the right description, ethical terror, then that that can result. But I do think it's really I think it's really important to shapes the way that I think about life in what it means to live in really, really critical ways. I'm so sorry. Now I'm monologuing. Right? But like my, my bit here would be to say like, my cheeky answer of like, I need more information. Is that like, when Rachel puts that scenario forward? What I think about is me at 29. And at 29. I've got a three year old kid. And there are a vast number of things that I desire to have in relationship to the people who are in my life at 29 that says, Hell no, go treat that pneumonia. But I can also imagine a 29 year old for whom those desires for relationships which would be really critical to how I would define life are really gone. And then the pneumonia is, is the friend that makes a death that is already realized for that person available to everyone else to mourn? Rachael Jackson 55:11 Yeah, I see a lot of what you're saying, Adam, as relevant to, like, the way that we kind of started and talking about, like, what, what are these different kinds of deaths and that we have, understandably, like an over emphasis maybe on like, the physical death. Because, you know, that's like, our physical bodies are a threat everyone, like sees and experiences immediately and, you know, I guess it's like, easier to make policies that affect those physical. Adam Pryor 55:53 Like, I can measure the thing that I just, Rachael Jackson 55:55 exactly. And that's what it like, the the scientific piece is, um, you know, it's far from simple, but it is simpler. And some cases, when you're dealing with, like, the physical stuff, but that there is, you know, we can talk about social death, or whatever other kind of death, but I think like, what you were just elaborating is, like, what I would call a social death of being totally disconnected, having like, no support system and no drive or capacity to be connected to a community or to a support system. And, you know, I get that that can like sound a little dramatic, I guess, to say, like, you're socially dead if you don't have those things. But, I mean, there's no, there's no denying that that makes an impact on people's lives, and all sorts of measurable ways that like social science has been measuring for, you know, many, many decades. And so that there's something about that feels really intuitive to me, even though, yeah, like you said, there's also like all kinds of other ethical conundrums that come up. But also, Adam Pryor 57:13 let me just say, I mean, I'm cheating. I did write part of my dissertation on like, phenomenologies of life and death. So like, it's not like I just like came out with this quickly, like, I mean, I've been thinking about it for a decade. So yeah, I just, I feel like I should I want to do research, Ian Binns 57:39 that I should all do research. I don't really wish you'd come up with these answers totally on the fly. So I'm gonna have to just dismiss everything you said? Zack Jackson 57:49 Well, I learned all of my lessons about death from the school of hard knocks out on the front lines. Adam Pryor 57:57 I mean, I will say too, though, I, I do think about it in personal ways, right? Like by my mother has pretty severe dementia. Right? Which has an interesting place within how people talk about death with dignity, right? It doesn't fit the legalistic framework that's been set up for like the Death with Dignity movement. And I think that's, its mean, a sound super cold. And I don't mean it that way. But it's like, in some ways, sort of interesting to see the ways in which working with a person who loses mental faculties illustrates the ways in which one's life is not one's own. Ian Binns 58:47 Well, what is the difference? I feel like I know the answer to this, but the difference between death with dignity and a living will Zack Jackson 58:55 a living well just says what you want to happen to you. Ian Binns 59:00 Right? So you know, if you're, Zack Jackson 59:03 if you're in a state where that sort of thing is legal, then you could put that in your living well, Ian Binns 59:09 right. Well, you make that but I mean, if you're in a situation like that's where you write down, you don't want any extraordinary measures are taken that kind of stuff. Zack Jackson 59:18 Right? Which listener if you don't have a living will, it's not hard to do and you should, you should definitely do it. My wife and I both have it you never know. You never know and it is always better for the people who are trying to take care of you if they know your wishes ahead of time and then every hospital Adam Pryor 59:35 chaplain will thank you Yep. Ian Binns 59:38 In my having written down Yes, every hospital chaplain will take you haven't officially written down and a living will takes away all those questions. Zack Jackson 59:48 Write and right let it let everyone know what you want for your funeral for my mom has been making a playlist for her funeral for years, which includes Zombie by the cranberries which I told her is in bad taste Adam Pryor 1:00:07 that decision Zack Jackson 1:00:14 Yes, she at one point wanted time if your life by green days she was going through something in the 90s until I told her that the name of the song is actually good riddance. And then time of your life, it's a tongue in cheek song. Despite the fact that every single graduating class in the late 90s, early 2000s used it in their graduation. It is not what you think when you talk Ian Binns 1:00:39 about like, for some reason, maybe think about this. But Did you all hear the story of the Irish man who died in 2019? And he set it up so that when his casket was being lowered into the grave, he had recorded himself? Oh, he was a prankster. As it's going down, all sudden, you hear his voice being like, hey, Adam Pryor 1:01:06 let me out. Let me Oh, stuff like that. That they put out, right? Yeah. The soul Bell like, you know, because sometimes they got it wrong. You weren't really bad, or people were afraid that they got it wrong, or that you weren't really dead. So you could ring a bell and they would open the casket real quick. And you know, usually that was gross. Rachael Jackson 1:01:25 Yeah, no, that is terrifying. Which is why if you get pressed into a gemstone and then have the rest of your body buried as Dustin of death, you can, you don't have to worry about that. Zack Jackson 1:01:39 This is the reason why Thomas the campus is not a saint, despite the fact that he wrote the second best selling Christian book of all time, the imitation of Christ, when they zoomed his body, they found claw marks on the top of the coffin because he had been buried alive and they said a real saint would have just accepted his debt instead of fighting it. And so they never canonized him, which is Bs, which is why I think I call him a saint when I when I think about my bookie and that's all that matters, right? Oh, boy. Ian Binns 1:02:13 So yes, dear listener, if we don't have in our notes, look it up Irishman pranks his family funeral, it was hilarious to watch. But the thing is that everyone expected it. Yeah. Okay, so first read it. They all tell everyone to do stuff like that. If you don't know, I don't think. I don't think he told them that he was gonna do that. I think maybe if you knew, but at least they knew he was a prankster. Right? And tell the funeral director telling jokes. And oh my gosh, it's so funny. To see all those people just chuckling. So, yeah, I think I'm gonna put some like that. So everyone Zack Jackson 1:02:58 wants that everyone wants people to laugh at their funeral. Everyone I've ever talked to about this, they always go, I don't want people to cry and be sad at my service. I want people to be happy and tell stories and laugh. And every single person said this, I always tell them, do you think there's anyone out there who wants their loved ones to cry? No. But we're going to, because we're going to miss you. You're not going to be there. So you really don't get a say in this. And I'm going to cry at your funeral. And there's nothing you can do to stop me. And if you want to haunt me, go ahead. I'd actually kind of like that, I think, at least for a little while. Don't do anything weird and creepy. So like, my grandma told me, she doesn't want to serve us because she doesn't want people crying. And I said, I don't care, grandma. And she looked at me and she was like, might you wait, no, this is what I want. And I said, I don't care, because you're not going to be here. And these services are for the living and not for the dead. And there have been too many times people didn't want to burden someone else by you know, they don't want them to be sad, and then they don't get closure. So I'm all for respecting people's wills and wishes and all of that. But I am not above throwing a gorilla funeral service. When I need to Ian Binns 1:04:13 fly I want to be I like in the various cultures around the world that treat it more as a celebration of life. Where they still have the moment and the funeral or somewhere where it is sad and things like that. But that it is a I remember, when I was a Peace Corps volunteer in Jamaica, that was what they were. Someone was explaining to me it's it's a celebration of that person's life. Zack Jackson 1:04:32 I learned recently that Church, The Orthodox Church has an annual Feast on the day of a person's death for the first couple of years. So you get your family back together. You have a big meal and you share stories of that person on the anniversary of their death. And I think that's Rachael Jackson 1:04:48 spectacular here. The dead one that's a great opportunity to hot people. Adam Pryor 1:04:54 Absolutely. So efficient and catterall. There. That's what everybody longs for. Zack Jackson 1:05:03 Just get them all in one place takes a lot of energy to haunt Adam. Ian Binns 1:05:08 Yeah, I will have to say, Zack that I do feel like this conversation was probably a little bit more uplifting than the conversation about middle age, Zack Jackson 1:05:21 which is hilarious, right? And a part of that, I think is because I wasn't there. I Ian Binns 1:05:25 feel I feel happier. After this one than I did the last one, Zack Jackson 1:05:30 the middle aged conversation was about the fear of death. And this one is about the acceptance of accepted it. It's great. Kendra Holt-Moore 1:05:41 Yeah, I was gonna, I was gonna end with a quote that was gonna bring us back down. But I guess I'll just leave that off. Because I feel like we're in a good place. Oh, God, go Ian Binns 1:05:49 ahead. Go ahead. Bring it No, I Kendra Holt-Moore 1:05:50 don't know that it fits. It also takes us back to like terror management theory, which we've kind of not really been talking about. So this is good. Zack Jackson 1:06:00 Okay, well, we can end our series with an announcement then, that this is the last episode in this mini series, which will bring us to, I think just about our two year anniversary. And so in celebration of that, and also because we have a whole bunch of professors that are going to be doing a lot of transitioning in this period, and a rabbi who will be entering into high holy days, and me who's just doing stuff. We're gonna we're gonna put up some of our favorite episodes from the first two years. And so if you missed them, or if you just want to listen to him again, because I've been listening to some of the older episodes, and there's some they're made of Kendra in there. And then after that, when we're gonna What's that? Yeah, they're made Oh, cuz they're gem gems. Ah, that was a call back I gotcha. Very well played. So when we come back from that, we've got a whole slate of new interviews and a new format for the show that will focus around storytelling, and a variety of new segments, which we're excited to bring you, which may or may not include books we've read or demons that we've loved or dead Christians. We want to tell fun stories about Rachael Jackson 1:07:29 and listener questions gonna leave you Zack Jackson 1:07:31 with that and listener questions. Oh, yeah, that's the important one. So we've got a lot in store for year three, and we're excited to bring it to you. gonna end it with that.
Episode 88 Our exploration of medical issues along the span of our lives has reached the middle age. That strange period of time whose goalposts are constantly shifting because the people on the lower end don't want to admit it's beginning and those on the other end, don't want to admit it's over. This period is marked by an awareness of our body's limitations and our stubborn refusal to get that weird new ache checked out by a doctor. It can be a time of self-realization, honest introspection, and spiritual awakening or it could also mean a new sportscar and expensive vices. People do funny things when they start to discover hairs in places they're not supposed to be! Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Rachael Jackson 00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are Ian Binns 00:17 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte. And if I were to pursue a midlife crisis, the first thing that hit my head was is I would get tattoos. My name is Adam Pryor, Adam Pryor 00:29 I work at Bethany college. If I were to live out one of my midlife crisis fantasies, it would be to send all of my children to boarding school and buy myself a convertible. Kendra Holt-Moore 00:48 Kendra Holt-Moore, PhD candidate at Boston University, and my midlife crisis would either be get an eyebrow piercing, or get really involved in local theater, and just audition for all the main characters and try to achieve small town fame. Rachael Jackson 01:08 Hi, this is Rachael Jackson, Rabbi at Agoudas, Israel congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina. And if there were a midlife crisis that I would fulfill, I think it would be going off the grid entirely, and just becoming a hermit with my cross stitch stuff, and just sitting there and stabbing fabric for hours on end. Adam Pryor 01:36 So, as the as the question has been to indicate today, we are talking about health care, and particularly the issues of middle age, which is sort of the least exciting period of healthcare is what I've decided, right? No, no violent birth or death, just the long stetic period where everything is supposed to be humming along like normal, and yet you feel worse about yourself every day. Rachael Jackson 02:05 This is totally a year episode. Exactly. Adam Pryor 02:11 does feel like I was built for this. So but it's interesting, right click, because it's hard to find a lot of information about issues in the middle of life, because ideally, things are sort of going along pretty normally. And so there are a couple of things that I found that I thought were really interesting. So most of the material that you find talking about healthy aging, particularly during this period, relates to mental health more than it does physical health. The second thing that I found that I thought was interesting was that folks who tend to be in middle age seem not to go to doctors. They're maybe even worse than their own children who don't want to go to the doctor, but you make them go. But then when you hit this long middle period, you suddenly stop going as regularly. So I have another confessional question for you. I'm just curious when the last time you went to a doctor was Rachael Jackson 03:07 I went to my GP in December. Adam Pryor 03:11 recognize my stats here? Ian Binns 03:14 Yeah, I went 10 to 10 days ago. Sorry. Adam Pryor 03:20 You guys are by representative sample in any way, shape, or form? Not Ian Binns 03:24 at all, because the moment you told us before we started recording that that's what the data tells us. I knew immediately. I'm throwing that out. Yeah. Because I've always been the if I got some wrong and call the doctor. Adam Pryor 03:36 Do you really? Rachael Jackson 03:38 Yeah, I'm the opposite of that. No, I'm the I only got a baseline kind of person. So that's why I went because I I was turning 40 this year. And because health insurance is stupid. It worked out better that I went in December of last year rather than wait until I officially turned 40 this March. So I went last December so I could get a baseline of Okay, this is what I am at 40. Plus it was a pandemic year. So I was super stressed. So what was what did I look like in a super stressed 40 year olds is kind of what why I went I won't be going this year. Kendra Holt-Moore 04:20 I don't have a GP. But I have been a graduate student with my health insurance through Boston University. So I would just go to Student Health Services, and then they might tell me to go somewhere else. So I guess that kind of counts as a GP services, Rachael Jackson 04:41 but you're also technically just just throwing that one out there. You're not also technically middle aged, Adam Pryor 04:45 correct? Yes, correct. Right. Kendra Holt-Moore 04:48 Throw in my throw in my experience there. I do try to avoid the doctor until something urgent happened. See, so and I have been in the last year Ian Binns 05:00 I have had some unusual medical things happen to me over the last 10 to 15 years, that that's another reason why I'm like, you know what something's going on. And I'm kind of like, I'm not really sure about this out. Now what I do is I send them a message to the online system and say, Hey, this is happening. thoughts. And if they want me to come in, I come in, just because, you know, but the running joke when I had that weird infection in my hand that hospitalized me for two days and led to two surgeries, you know, and would have killed me if I had not gone in all the guys I work out with said, Hey, man, it's really good euro was because if it happened, any of us we would have been dead. I was like, exactly. Explaining, you have no idea how much my finger hurt, and they just like did just know, your finger. Does not matter. So yeah, because I went in is a reason why I didn't have to have anything amputated and or end up dying. So you know. Adam Pryor 06:07 So worth the check. So it was worth the check. Absolutely. Ian Binns 06:14 And I've had kidney stones several times. So yeah, when stuff happens, I'm just like, yeah, that's what they're there for. I also I'm under that, I think, mindset because growing up on a military facility in Germany, and even though my parents were divorce, I was still under my dad's medical insurance as a retiree. And so there was never a costs associated with going, you know, our my insurance was, I was fully covered with everything. And when you have something wrong, you just went in, I remember the first time I had to go to the doctor, I was in college, and they asked me about the copay, I just kind of looked at what was he talking about. And it was actually I didn't even know where to go first. Because there was no urgent care. For the most part, it was if he had something wrong, you know, on the military facilities, at least at the time, it was more of like, here's the ER, here's this kind of stuff. And that's where you went. And I remember kind of suggesting that someone and they're just like, what do you know, you don't go to the RFA, you go to urgent care. I didn't know what it was. So yeah, it was big, you know, wake up call. And as Rachel said, insurance is ridiculous. Adam Pryor 07:27 Yeah, I feel like the insurance piece is the like, largest factor of health care and middle age. Like, I, cuz I don't know about you. But anyway, it will everywhere. But but in particular in middle age, because I feel like you're you're kind of healthy enough to sort of roll along, if you so choose. But also, you start to get aware that like, probably somebody should, you know, take a look under the hood and make sure everything's okay. It's like when your car hits 100,000 miles, right, there are just some things you probably shouldn't do. And you also go, I really don't want to, because I know how much this will cost. Maybe not everybody feels that way. I certainly feel that way. Every time my wife looks at me and says you should go to doctor. And I say no, because I'm just too cheap. Rachael Jackson 08:20 Right? No, I think I think you're absolutely right. That it's it's partly our system. So it'd be interesting to see, because you were you were our anecdotal evidence or our anecdotal stories kind of disproved your scholarship article that you were saying that, you know, people have this general age Don't. Don't go. So I'm wondering if if it is a health insurance thing? What about countries that have universal health care if they experienced the same sort of dip in activity at this particular age range? Adam Pryor 08:56 Yeah, importantly, they don't. This is a distinctly and Rachael Jackson 09:00 they know that. Great. Adam Pryor 09:02 Yes. The World Health Organization has looked at that significantly, right. In terms of talking about what, what happens when you provide universal access to health care. Right. And I think it's interesting, right, because like, in some ways, all three of us, I'm going to explode you Kendrick cuz you're not middle aged yet. But the three of us who want Rachael Jackson 09:25 to be associated with you, people. Adam Pryor 09:26 That's right. Hey, now, don't worry. You're gonna feel good about talking about houses soon? Yeah. No, like, there's this, this element that I do kind of wonder like, are we not necessarily good representative samples across the board? One because of education, but to because of access to probably I would assume reasonable health insurance, even if not great health insurance? Rachael Jackson 09:55 If reasonable means that it costs the same as my mortgage then yes, yes. I have actually Access to reasonable health insurance. I, Ian Binns 10:05 we realized and I this was interesting to me, and this is not saying anything bad about where I used to work, but the health coverage in Louisiana was better than it is here in North Carolina, now that the services Yeah, there's no I'm not worried about anything. But when it came to the insurance part, like the premiums that we had to pay every month were lower than, you know, for me and and on it than it would have been for here and I. But then, if we they had a really interesting system there. It was called LSU. First, it was like a three tiered system. And the first year was LSU. First and if provider or hospital was part of the LSU, first, you paid nothing. Like that was part of their system. There was no copay, nothing. It was amazing. And then you had like, then the next tier was is that you had, they were in network, and then you had your deductible, right, and your copay. And then you had out of network deductible copay, which is obviously a whole lot more. But it was just, I remember seeing that when we got down there. And I just like, Whoa, that's amazing. So even when the twins are born, the hospital we did it in was one that was under the LSU first system. So it was considerably cheaper than it would have been if we gone to the other hospital. Which I find fascinating. But I think one of the things that really helped me was all about middle aged stuff, and insurance and all those things that when I did have that issue, that infection in my finger, they weren't sure what was going on. And we were sitting in the earth or the hand surgeon's office, and they were trying to look at it. Like, we don't know what this is. But we know we have to do an immersion surgery tonight. And this was at three o'clock in the afternoon telling us this. I do remember and then having to call the hospitals to make sure they took my medical insurance. Now I'm on the state health plan. So ended up not being a problem. But I do recall also to either the PA or the doctor or somebody suggesting to and make sure the hospital that we're going to take your insurance. Right. And I be I was always shocked. I'm still shocked by that, that. That's just unbelievable, right. And by the second surgery, which was in April of that year, I had reached my out of pocket maximum. So I paid nothing else the year when I would go the doctor, even for PT because of the hand. They In fact, even the physician's assistant at the time was like, well, we probably want to get you an occupational therapy. I'm not sure what your insurance looks like. And I said, Well, I've meet I've met the out of pocket maximum. He's like, Oh, well, we're just gonna write you for a whole bunch of them then. But it was just that mindset of that's what's so wrong with our system. So we'll get there, Kendra, you'll get there. Kendra Holt-Moore 13:05 Hi. Yeah, I've got some stories to share already. My husband almost went deaf a couple years ago. And so the doctor's bills of trying to like get that all sorted out. It's pretty insane. Rachael Jackson 13:21 Yep. I wanted to tackle one of your other points there, Adam. We were saying that. No, why not? Right, is it that we're just kind of status quo. And then at this, at this particular point in life, people focus on mental health, as opposed to strictly physical health of those, the two are often quite related. So that but the one of the other pieces that I was really thinking about is also at this point of life. And let's let's clarify. So I just asked two and a half questions. So let me ask a third actual question and start there. How are we defining middle life? Adam Pryor 14:08 How do you want to define middle middle life or middle age? Rachael Jackson 14:14 Yeah, I think that's a crucial question. Adam Pryor 14:19 Right? We were talking a little bit before, like things started right like that it keeps getting pushed older. I'm going to blame the baby boomers, because I blame them for everything. And I'm assuming that they just don't want to be old. So they want middle age to go further and further and further, right. Like, now middle ages to 65. And I'm like, No, no, no, you're old. You're not middle aged anymore. You're your past middle aged. I like to use 40. That's the number that I think of. And like plus or minus 40. Right. But like it there's something about that like statistically I am closer to death than I am closer to both Right, and that impending move that I go, that's to me where the like the middle life piece hits, which I know is not necessarily a popular answer. And there are different ways to do it. But it feels very 15:15 straightforward to me. Kendra Holt-Moore 15:38 makes sense to me like I wouldn't. Yeah, I wouldn't say that, like 65 should be the new like middle aged mark. But 40 does feel young ish to me. Like, again, I'm speaking as the non middle aged person in the virtual room. But I think that, like technological advancements, people are living longer and will continue to live longer than we had previously. And so it does, it makes sense to me to have middle age, scoot a little bit further back then the 40. Mark, because I just, yeah, just like, a lot of older people I know who are like grandparents or great grandparents, or I know a lot of people who live well into their 90s. And, you know, not saying that, that's like the norm for everyone, but it's becoming more the norm. And so, yeah, I would scooch it back. Adam Pryor 16:34 It could be that I'm still fully anticipating to die by 80. Yeah, possibly seven. Kendra Holt-Moore 16:38 Middle Age, right. Rachael Jackson 16:40 But so when I was looking, and there's a it depends where you look, when does it start, I've seen the start of middle age be 3540 or 45. And the end of middle age be either 60 or 65. I haven't seen middle age end later than 65. The average life expectancy for the United States for men is 80. And for women 84. So I think you're not wrong, Adam to say that you don't expect to live past 80. That's the average life expectancy of men, your personal genetics, your family, genetics, your lifestyle. All of that, of course, has an issue, but 40 is straight up minute like you've literally lived half your life. Right? Like from a mathematical standpoint, none of us actually know when we're going to die. But given statistics, half is done. Right. And I think and then from a female standpoint, right, our physiol our physiology, right? If if we're only seen of as birthing machines, then then the question might be, when does half of your birthing abilities end? Right? So if we, if we look at what menstruation starts and say 13, rounding small nut rate 13. And when does it end? 5055. Right, depending on depending, again, dependent. So if we say 55. So it's 20 years, or excuse me, 40 years, half of that is 35. Right? So from a female biological standpoint, 35 would be the start of middle aged half of your birthing your reproductive life is over. So in that way, and and that's a medical place. So I think 35 is also not an not an air. When we look at jobs, people aren't necessarily retiring at 60 or 62, or even 65. Right? Some people are working until 7075. So to say, Well, I'm How long is my work history. So if my work history is 50 years, and I start when I'm 22, middle age isn't going to start until I'm 45. Right? So I I think there's value and understanding when we're talking these ages that there's a lot of different lenses that we can use. And from a from a psychological and an emotional standpoint. I see middle aged also and not necessarily in this generation because people are living so much longer. really starting to kick in. And the end of middle age. Where middle age ends is when your next when the generation before you has died. When you know if we're if we're looking at the natural order of things and saying Okay, my parents, my aunts and uncles, all of them, they've died. I'm next. And to me, that's one of those places that indicates the end of middle age. That's how, from an emotional standpoint, which is also why like, why should I go to the doctor, I don't want them to find things. I don't want I don't want That reality, Ian Binns 20:01 so helps you realize that you're not or that you are mortal. Rachael Jackson 20:06 Right? Right. I mean, teenagers and adolescence that's a better term adolescence go through an invincible stage. I think in middle age, we go through an immortal stage. I know, I know, I can get hurt, but I'm gonna live forever. Adam Pryor 20:27 reckoning with mortality. Rachael Jackson 20:29 Yes. Yeah. And it's hard. Adam Pryor 20:35 does kind of suck any other way to put it. Ian Binns 20:42 So I started looking at, like signs that you have reached middle age, Rachael Jackson 20:45 or what people think and know when those were written. So if you're looking at, you know, like huffington post things, make sure when they're ready. Yeah, Ian Binns 20:54 that one's funny. The Huffington Post one that was update in 2017. There's some pretty funny ones on here. Rachael Jackson 21:02 Are you gonna Why are you just gonna leave it like that? No, hold Ian Binns 21:04 on, a hair starts appearing everywhere. When your nose face ears. Hair Reading on your? Yeah, Reading on your phone becomes difficult because the font is suddenly too tiny and blurry. The shed or basement becomes your favorite place. you've Adam Pryor 21:21 dug a little too, too close to home. Ian Binns 21:24 That's why I read that one. Oh. You begin thinking policemen, teachers and doctors look really young. Yeah. Yeah. You are obsessed with your health. You begin looking over the top of your glasses. You start enjoying naps more than ever. Rachael Jackson 21:50 No. naps are for everything. Except for as punishment for children. Right? Because they think it's a punishment. But Adam Pryor 21:58 yeah, forever. Ian Binns 22:00 You find yourself saying what and huh? All the time. You find a lot harder to lose weight a whole lot harder. You don't know any of the songs played on the radio. Gardening becomes an obsession. You develop? You develop little leaks. This is a good one. Yeah. You grow and every time you bend over, Rachael Jackson 22:28 that could have happened to anybody at different times, depending on what their birthing was like. Ian Binns 22:34 Yeah. Anyway, those are some some. Yeah. Adam Pryor 22:40 I hadn't hadn't thought about defining middle aged by how leaky you are. Kind of like that. Mm hmm. So I can't wait. Kendra Holt-Moore 22:55 Some of those already apply though, actually. Yeah. Ian Binns 22:57 See, I told you, you're on your way. Yeah, that's fine. Rachael Jackson 23:02 It's the alternative. Adam Pryor 23:07 what's the alternative? Rachael Jackson 23:09 data? Adam Pryor 23:11 Ah, I like that, that no one's used forever. Nobody. Nobody went with like the transhumanist answer there. That's good. That's good. Rachael Jackson 23:21 We covered that. That's, that's not what we want. That we want. We want death. Ian Binns 23:26 So I wish dear listener Tune in next time when Kendra takes us on a conversation about death. Oh, yeah, it's gonna be great. Adam Pryor 23:35 In preparation for that conversation about death is as we reach this sort of, like, middle aged piece, right, we talked a little bit about this, this idea that like, mental health becomes a big piece of how people think about it. And there's this in a lot of the in a lot of research, there's this this sort of description of a longing for youth, right, a sort of almost like a nostalgia for things that you used to be able to do. But now, perhaps that was no longer a good idea is my way of describing it. So I ran into this the other day, when I was throwing Linus up in the air. And I went, did that was a it was a poor decision in relationship to when I did this with Henry. And I didn't even like think about it. And Henry was a heavier child, and that made me more depressed. I've known what that experience was Rachael Jackson 24:33 like, but just to clarify, the two of them are what, nine years apart Adam Pryor 24:36 nine years apart? Yeah. Were you stronger than I am immortal, more physically? Ian Binns 24:45 were you doing more physical things and like physically fit the new aren't new and Adam Pryor 24:49 now I feel as though I feel like I can say that for like, a 37 year old. I am like, relatively fit. I went out and biked 105 months. Last weekend, like I feel thing, I feel relatively fit. I've been cycling a lot like, you know, I don't feel undue in that regard, but also, like, not like when I was in my, you know, mid 20s and could swing my child around without abandon no matter what. Ian Binns 25:21 Well, all the reason why I'm asking this because like, for example, because of, you know, when I joined f3, and started doing boot camp style workouts, when I was a kid, and stuff and a runner, I never had upper body strength. So I can never do pull ups or anything like that. Now, I can't go out right now and knock knock many pull ups out because I'm not because of the pandemic as I've I've never really worked on physical strength, like I had before. But when I was training for those Spartan races, yeah, I can knock out pull ups, and that was 39 4041. So I was definitely more physically stronger than than I was maybe when the kids were born. Was that's why I was asking like, Is it just because in middle age now there are aches and pains that I have now that didn't especially back pains, back and neck pains that you're just like, oh, that was one of the ones I did not read off. Back in, like back in that pains. And then it also made me think to one of the things I saw on another list was purchasing your decor for your house. That if you're more excited about that, then other things, toys or whatever, that's obviously a big difference, Rachael Jackson 26:30 like going out on Saturday night. A fun date on Saturday night is like Home Depot, Target, and Sam's. Yeah. You know, yeah, free samples. Adam Pryor 26:40 Or then even like the type of good free samples are back, I just want to Rachael Jackson 26:44 do that for you. They're not back for us. They Adam Pryor 26:46 are they're coming back for us. And it is going to drive my grocery bill down. Yeah, because I get to eat me some free samples. Ian Binns 26:57 That's a middle aged thing. I would say cuz you're sitting there wouldn't I mean, can you say what you said it to drive my grocery bill down? Adam Pryor 27:05 That's right. That's what I'm worried about. Kendra Holt-Moore 27:06 I don't know if that's a middle aged. Rachael Jackson 27:09 shoe. That's a cheap thing. Ian Binns 27:11 That's a cheap item. Okay. You're right. That's that's just cheap. Adam. That's true. Rachael Jackson 27:17 That's true. Okay, in typical Rachael fashion. Can we talk about the positives, though? Adam Pryor 27:26 There are positives. There are parts. Are you sure? Because I bet I can split all your positives into negatives. Okay, Rachael Jackson 27:34 you were just saying you're not as strong as you were before. Ian Binns 27:36 I need my popcorn. Well played on that one, Rachel, thank you. I'm ready. I'm ready. Remember, she lifts weights. Flip it. Rachael Jackson 27:48 One of the things that I think really happens to people in this category of middle age, however a person chooses to identify when it starts and when's it ends, is a really knowing oneself. And this is where I think the midlife crisis concept comes in, where a person finally realizes that they are mortal. And that time is the most precious thing that we have. And because of that, we don't want to waste it. And so there's a reevaluation of life a reevaluation of priorities of reevaluation of self. And that transformation, that metamorphosis, I think, is absolutely beautiful. And there's a sort of understanding of not really caring as much what others think that a particular age you know, that turns into curmudgeonly old men usually, but it's, it develops in a nice way early. So that that that for me is one of the biggest positives that I see in this category of middle age. Adam Pryor 29:25 But I'm gonna just turn that on its head a little bit, right, like, cuz that might go really poorly. And what was well, right, so I think part of what goes on with that midlife crisis is exactly this sort of like self awareness that you're describing, right? But what happens when you're aware that the self you've become is drastically, drastically not what you want to be, Rachael Jackson 29:48 then you change Adam Pryor 29:52 or you buy a convertible Rachael Jackson 29:54 or get a tattoo you find really poor coping mechanisms. Correct. Given that that's at every stage Well, yes, I'm in the hence the poor weight loss issues. Yeah. Right then. But I mean, I think of an unhealthy coping mechanism that our society has made a joke of, but I don't Adam Pryor 30:15 I think part of this is that like the, the discovery of self is not inherently positive. Right? It's a sort of neutral item, I think, Oh, Rachael Jackson 30:27 really? Ian Binns 30:29 When that'd be based on perspective, load the discovery of like, yeah, I, I'm with you, Rachel, you say, say that, again, Adam Pryor 30:38 the discovery of self is not inherently positive. I think it's neutral. Kendra Holt-Moore 30:43 Oh, yeah. I agree with that. Rachael Jackson 30:45 Same Oh, Kendra. Kendra Holt-Moore 30:49 I just, I mean, it's such a personal like process. But I think what I hear when Adam says that is that people over the course of their lives, and not just in middle age, although I'm sure it can, like, Look, a particular way, because that's when we talk about things like midlife crisis, and all of that, but people have different like practices and hobbies, and you know, life circumstances change you and you just become more self aware over the course of your life, or not everyone does become more self aware, actually. And it just, yeah, I think, what, what Adam just said, is that, like, you can wake up one day and realize that you're not who you hoped you would be, and might also find it really hard to change into who you hope to be. And I don't know, like, there's just a million factors that play into, like, what constitutes the self? And I guess that's maybe the bigger, more daunting question is, like, what do we what are we discovering when we discover the self, but I just think that, yeah, like to be satisfied with the self, that you discover, probably has a lot to do with things like, healthy support system, and financial stability, and, you know, like, meaning making processes that are, you know, accessible to you. And, and that, I mean, those things aren't like, what we typically consider to be an inherent part of the self, but they, I think, make life a lot easier for us to become our best selves. And, and so yeah, it's just, it feels like a really, like, life is complicated. discovering who we are, or creating ourselves. The way that we want to be is just, yeah, it's a real mixed bag for people. And so it feels really intuitive to me that that, that does, that it is a neutral process, because it can be it can look very good for some people and very bad for others. And it's wrapped up in all of these like social factors, too. And some people just don't have a lot of control over those things and what they do have control over? Well, yeah, I guess that's still, that's still brings us to a conversation about like, you know, it's it's not what it's not about, like what you can't control, but it's about like, the attitude you have towards the things you can't control, like little quotes like that about, you know, who you are, who you're not, and, yeah, so anyway, I just find that a really intuitive way to talk about like self discovery. What does that not feel? I'm curious about what, what you guys are thinking Rachel and he and, Dan, Ian Binns 33:52 I think the way you said it was a lot nicer. I'm just gonna say it. So Adam Pryor 33:59 the way Kendra said it? Ian Binns 34:01 I do. I do. Because I feel like it still gets the way I was thinking of it was a perspective thing, right? It's how you approach it. And and I think that shifts, depending on what stage of life you're in, and also can just depend on the day, you know, or the moment that you're experiencing something. And so I guess, over time, it could average out as neutral feeling that way. But go ahead. Well, so one of the things that, you know, that I This helped a lot with, like all of the mindfulness meditation I've done is to really focus on which I just hit one year, 34:44 daily. Ian Binns 34:45 Last Friday, I was very excited with that 10% happier group. But is that right? And then I still also we're still working progress, obviously but recognizing what I can and cannot control and to learn it. let that go is tough. Right? So I think by the fact that I'm getting better at that than I used to be, that would make it I think things more positive, because I'm recognizing what I have control over. But if I'm in a foul mood, or struggling on that day, it doesn't matter. This Yeah. It will be a negative perspective. So, Kendra Holt-Moore 35:27 yeah, yeah. And I just wanted to add that, like, what I just said, I could see how maybe it sounds like a little bit deterministic of like, oh, what, what's around you makes you who you are. And I do think that's true to an extent, but also, like, what you're saying, in the personal practices, we have to try to, you know, like, create ourselves or however you want to phrase that. It's, it's a matter of practice and like determination to some extent that. Yeah, you might not feel the same every day. And that's okay. I don't think that really like, changes your, like, fundamental being, it's just that, like, we, I think humans, we have practices for ourselves, we participate in rituals, we have community and support systems, because that those things do create a boundedness around who we perceive ourselves to be. And we, we each have many different roles in our families, and friends and communities. And that those are all ways that we, that we do, like, derive a sense of who we are. And some of that's like aspirational, you know, like, if you strip that all away, like, what, how would that make you different than who you are? In your role as like, teacher, pastor, Mother, you know, all of these things? So it's just like a really, it's a really difficult question, I think, to, to answer without thinking about the things we do to practice being ourselves in the forms of, you know, practices like meditation or attending that, like, a Bible study group every Sunday, or showing up to class to teach every week, you know, things like that. So just wanted to add that Rachel has a very quizzical look on her face. Yeah, Rachael Jackson 37:25 I I hear what you're saying. totals, parent medical tangential aside, I think everyone needs to go through active listening and assertive speaking. training. So I hear what you're saying. I think I'm coming at it from a very different place. from a place of I think, Adam, you said status quo. Right? That's, that's one of the characteristics of this time of life is status quo. And when I compare that to other phases of life, say, if we look at, right post middle age, what happens after middle age? What, like, what happens? What how are we? How are we calling that old? elderly? Right? I, it depends. And then there's medical terminology of elderly or older, or frail, all of those different fragile, right, these are all medical terms that can be used in those ways. But if we say, elderly, right or old, right, you have middle age, and you go to old, and you go to elderly, old and elderly, are in our society, because that's someone that we can really speak to, are categorized, often by the decline of the body, and the re evaluation of the self outside of a profession. Whether that profession was raising children, or having a career or whatever it was with that there's there's a shift in our culture of Oh, now you're retired. And that's, that's a very big shift in our human doing our productivity, our you have to, so that our society is very surrounded around that. So I think older and elderly are really looking at redefining the self outside of a profession. And in terms of the body, right, the body itself starts to really decline in those points. Youth, adolescence, is categorized and for me looked at as finding yourself within society, like pushing the boundaries, where is authority? How do I fit in? How do I fit there, like I am knowing mostly who I am, but it's an age of exploration. This status quo is a I've established what my career is more Less, I've established more or less, at least a partnership or not a partnership, a child like rearing children or not rearing children that there's a, these things are not necessarily fully brand new at this point, right? Most people don't say at 50. Now I want children when I didn't want them for the last 30 years. It could be a Oh, shucks. Now we have another right there. I mean, it's not saying that it doesn't happen, but that it rarely at that stage of life, is it a, yes, this is what I want. And I've never given it any thought. But that it's a status quo, which allows us to then in a slow, methodical, or not even methodical, but in a in a status quo sort of way to say, is this who I am. And I think and I will, I will very much saying I really appreciate you pointing out Kendra, that this is coming from a point of privilege. This is most definitely coming from a place of privilege that I didn't earn. Some of it, I did most of it, I didn't. And that there are people who don't have the privilege to have that conversation of self, which is one of the the markers of modernity, as opposed to pre modern era, right, they didn't have this luxury work for 15 hours a day, six days a week is. So having said all of that I come from a place of this is our time to just sort of slow down and figure out what what not what we're trying to reclaim, which is what I think you were trying to look at Adam, but how to re hone who we are. And even if it's a even if it's a 180 from who we are, it's a I can now confidently say at 40. I am an introvert. I am not shy. But I'm definitely an introvert I am a low energy person. I am a particular food eater. not picky. But I like what I like. And I'm gonna change that a whole lot. And it's okay that I like blue box mac and cheese. And I'm not going to apologize for that. And I'm not going to feel bad about it. I'm not going to feel bad about who I am or my choices and feel like someone's judging me. Anything that's that's the recognition of self that has nothing to do with my role as a clergy person, as a spouse as a parent. It's a Who am I What do I like to do? What are the things that make me happy? Not my mood. And if you'll if you'll allow me the ability to make one more analogy. One of the things I hear you saying Ian is really like weather. Today's weather. How do I feel today? Right? And that's weather. Right today? Like it was 105 degrees in Billings, Montana yesterday, that is absurd. And it snowed in Texas. And that is absurd. Right? The weather is the daily changes, but the climate. That's what we're looking at now. And I'm saying at this point in our life, this is when we can recognize the climate is changing. Can we change it? Do we want it to change? if so how? Right? cooler Texas sounds great, hotter, Montana, not great. Warmer oceans, bad idea. Poor little sharks, heard a whole story on sharks and being in mermaid purses and stuff like that, and how warm oceans are making them die. Like that. That would be the negative. But I think inherently it is good, I think inherently. And that's why I'm saying it's not inherently neutral. I think it's inherently good to look at oneself in the mirror and say this is who I am. And I'm good with that. So that that for me is the positive. Because we're not focusing on developing the career rearing the young worrying about our bodies. Again, speaking from a place of privilege. Adam Pryor 44:30 Okay with that, if you're good with it. It's the person who looks at it and says, I'm not, and there's no mechanism to change that I look at and go, that's a that's a different sort of notion of what self discovery is. Rachael Jackson 44:49 Why is there not a mechanism to change that's what I don't understand. Adam Pryor 44:54 privilege. Rachael Jackson 44:57 Can you say more? Yeah. You're like me, I'm dead body? Adam Pryor 45:01 No. So I do it this way. I'm Joe trucker. And Joe trucker has woken up at 45. And gone, I spent 20 years of my life driving truck. And I'm not sure that I believe that I've actually done anything good in the world. And I would like to do something good in the world. And I have no savings by which to change the structure of the day to day grind that I find myself in. That is not a moment of self discovery that I would say is inherently good. Rachael Jackson 45:33 disagree. Adam Pryor 45:35 But I think that's because you assume the structure of knowing the truth is good. Rachael Jackson 45:41 I do assume that, Adam Pryor 45:43 and I do. Ian Binns 45:44 But you are also Adam. I feel like with the example you just gave, you're still not fully in that person's perspective. No, no, no, no, you've not you've not lived that perspective. So you do not know. So that's the the, the To me, it sounds like. And so I want to push back a little bit on that, like I see your point, Adam, with that example, based on my perspective, I would I would potentially see that the same way. But based on the person who's lived that entire life in their perspective, I don't, I don't, I can't say how I would say, Adam Pryor 46:19 if you can't say how you would see it, I also don't think you can say self discovery is inherently good. Rachael Jackson 46:24 But I see what the problem that I have with your analogy, is that you're basing that on a person's profession, that person could then say, Yep, I am a trucker. And I feel like I haven't done anything good in the world. Now, let me go be a trucker for a company that I feel does good in the world. Or now let me take this time that I have, because I might truck 60 hours a week, but I have two hours that I could give. And I'd rather do that because this is a lack that I feel and I can do something about that. So so the profession might not change the situation of having savings might not change. But that self discovery can be a very positive change. Adam Pryor 47:05 But But I think cannon is are two different things. It can be a positive change, Rachael Jackson 47:13 there is no try only do Adam Pryor 47:15 like, but will it be is is is also a is part of what I would press back on there. And why I would call it neutral. Okay. Kendra Holt-Moore 47:26 Yeah, I was gonna also reflect that I think that Adams hypothetical, it's not that the hypothetical is always the case that like Joe trucker is going to reflect on his his himself as, you know, being like in a negative or positive position. It's just that both of those possibilities can happen. And because of the potential for that to go that either way, that that's where the neutrality lies. Adam Pryor 48:01 I mean, I work in higher ed, I I'm generally in favor of self discovery, as like something that's important. Rachael Jackson 48:07 Yeah. You sway me towards neutrality. I can, I can see that. But But you're right, Adam, I do I do believe that, you know, the more truth we know. That is inherently good. That I do. That is more my my perspective, my worldview. I do not believe of ignorance is bliss, kind of Ian Binns 48:32 reverse. I agree with that worldview. Of course, there are things that we can learn. That is true that we may not like when you put it all together. I still feel like yeah, it's better to know when you put it all together, again. Now, you can come with example right now that would be like, Oh, I'm betting he wouldn't like this. And then you tell me and I'd get mad. But then after that, I'll do Adam Pryor 49:05 that alone. I'll let you do in your optimism for a while. That's fun. Thank you Rachael Jackson 49:10 do in optimism. That means that it's going to concentrate more and I'm going to be even more optimistic then. Adam Pryor 49:17 That does seem to be how it works for people. Rachael Jackson 49:20 It is I'm sorry, you don't understand it. Okay, well, optimistic me. Cuz that's who I am. And I'm not gonna apologize for it. But that's okay. Um, is there anything else? Good? Adam Pryor 49:46 I don't know You were the one who said you could come up with good things about about middle age. Rachael Jackson 49:50 Yeah, Adam Pryor 49:51 I mean, I was I was just here to turn them over and make them bad. Yeah. So Rachael Jackson 49:58 I think the take no crap attitude. is a good thing. Ian Binns 50:01 All right, I wouldn't say that necessarily comes with it. Kendra Holt-Moore 50:06 And also, I could turn you potentially like just to get, I feel like I'm really with Adam in this crap attitude is something that I am, I also am like starting to feel the older I get, I was actually just talking about this with my sister who is in her mid 20s. And how we like, are definitely starting to care a lot less about what other people say, the older we get, and how that can be a great thing. But it can also make you a Karen well, so you know, good and bad. I say this for myself, too. Because I, I don't want to I don't want to be a caring. But sometimes it's it's hard not started to manager. Adam Pryor 51:00 I think what starts to like put itself out there, right? Are these there's a mixed bag of what this process of reaching middle age both in terms of like bodily health, mental health, the process of self evaluation, like dope. It can take us in different directions, much like other stages of life, right. So like, even if we talk about Middle Ages, this status quo, right between because I liked your like Rachel, like the like, curve up in the curve down. Right the like, there's development and growth. And this is exciting, but also, like I would never ever want to be a teenager again. middle aged feels much better than being a teenager. I'm watching my child reach into teenage them and going I hate you go back to being a child or skip right into being 20. But this this mid No, no, nobody likes you right now. I say that to the cat, also, but that's fine. So like, there's that element, right? And then I think you can say the same thing on the other side, right like that. Like I like your distinction between old and elderly. Right? Like there's this element of I remember speaking with a very good scholar at a conference, and she sort of halfway joked about I just can't think as fast as I used to. And sort of stopped and paused and then said, No, but I really mean it like this, this body that I am now is not who I am. Right? There's this element of like being betrayed by one's physical sensations, which in middle age, I feel like hasn't happened yet. Like you can be slightly dissatisfied or there's hair where there wasn't here before. There might be a grown. There's a grown from lifting things up and throwing children around. But right. But like in general, there's there's not that sense of like bodily betrayal that can come later. But I think there is this element. Right. And this is what I think is curious about the whole middle aged conversation where it intersects with health is this this element of like, an awareness of that status of old and elder of that eventual bodily betrayal suddenly being around the corner which can feel impending in a positive or negative way. I mean, the way I phrased it does not make it sound great. But I understand it could be phrased positively. Ian Binns 53:39 But it comes back to the mortality conversation we were having earlier. Adam Pryor 53:42 Yeah, right. I feel like like Middle Ages, this like element of like, mortality, contemplation, and depending on how positive or negative you are, right, like waiting for the other shoe to drop of being old and elderly or of having old and elderly cut short. Right. So I, my my thinking about this has like changed since I said that I would start to do it right, because we had this local pastor who died very suddenly. You know, truck came across the highway hit ambu. So Harley, and his 10 year old daughter died almost instantly. 13 year old survived, which is miraculously Ian Binns 54:28 weird. longer. That happened a Adam Pryor 54:31 week two weeks ago. Okay. So it's this, right? And I'm a fairly well educated, I did all the pastoral training stuff I can identify when I'm parallel processing. And yet it doesn't stop that process of parallel processing right like it continues to occur. And, you know, my my wife and I mccobb Lee joked while also sort of doing the process of grieving that as part of that to say You know, she she halfway of that when I said like, I'm, you know, I'm going on right and 100 miles like, also she's like, and then you'll never come back. That's what I think about every time you walk out the door with your bicycle, and you get run over, or you're going to flip over the handlebars. And it's not fun, right? In the same way that like, there's this like element that creeps in that like, you know, every time I send my pre adolescent teen who I hope will soon be 20 out on his bicycle to like ride to school, I'm like, someone's going to run you over, then you'll just be dead. And I feel like that is a hallmark of middle age that there is this, like awareness that creeps into the way in which you treat all of these other health related concerns. Rachael Jackson 55:52 Yeah, I think so. I mean, to share something sort of personal. They're one of I've always been with people who are night owls. And so my husband now like, stays out until two o'clock, three o'clock in the morning, sometimes even later. That's just his personality, and it's fine for us. But I it's fine for our relationship. But I as a person and emotionally go, oh my god, he's not coming home. Oh my God. He said he'd be home at two and it's 230. And what is going on? And just last night, like I'm asleep, and it's almost two o'clock. It's like 145 in the morning, and I see this bright light in my eyes. Like what is going on is like, I need you to get up the cars in a ditch. And my heart just like skipped a beat. I was just like, but you're in the house. So you're okay. Like, okay, so the cars in a ditch, like that was one of my big that was that was a big fear. And oh, yeah, I'm like trying to figure he's okay. But he's great. But he like he was the one that shined the flashlight in my face. He's like, you need to wake up. But having confronting it in those ways, saying, This is exactly my fear. And so every time you leave the house, this is what I feel like. Adam Pryor 57:07 But I think it's that element to that. It's like, it's not just your own mortality, that's part of this, right? Like, it's this recognition of is literally everyone else's mortality, and how that sort of works for you. Right? Rachael Jackson 57:19 Everyone's going to die. Adam Pryor 57:21 Right? Like, every time Rachel's, like every time you walk out the door with your bicycle, I'm afraid you're gonna die. I'm like, Well, every time you gave birth, I was pretty sure that I was going to be parenting by myself. So, you know, live with it. But also, like, Rachael Jackson 57:36 but it is this sort of shillington that three times you do this every week, just like Adam Pryor 57:41 my level of intense fear was justified, because that's a horrible process birthing. I mean, it's beautiful, but also, like, try Holy smokes Ian Binns 57:50 on that we. So while we were going through the classes when I was pregnant with the twins, and there were classes specific for multiples, right. And so they were talking about, it'll have to be a C section. Sometimes it could be emergency c sections. And sometimes there could be complications, but and so they were trying to tell the dads that, you know, there's a chance that if you're in a surgery, there's a complication that may have to whisk you out of the room, but everything's gonna be okay. So they were telling us, and I just raised my hand and said, yeah, that doesn't work for me. And they just said, What do you mean doesn't work for you? I said, So you're telling me that there could be a potential that for like an hour, I would have no idea what's going on with my wife who just gave birth these two babies. And you want me to be like, Oh, cool. And I just I kept pushing back. And finally, but and helped me change your perspective, saying that? Well, honey, if that did happen, it would help me knowing that you are with our children. Making sure they're okay. Right. And so the perspective had to shift for me, but I see your point on that one. I mean, it was like, You can't just say that and then be like, but it's all good, you're fine. And it made while waiting for them to give her the epidural because it was a C section. And so I had to wait outside of the operating room for them to do that process. And I would see because we had two teams of doctors, nurses and stuff for the babies. And then of course, the doctor and the nurses for and that they're all walking in and out and I'm just sitting there staring down going in and out. And I did that that was tough. I was those exciting moment. But for those few moments, it was terrifying. I Adam Pryor 59:31 mean, I think the intensity of those sorts of moments that you have, like earlier in your life are now spread at a low level across every day. Zack is never gonna let me lead an episode ever again. Ian Binns 59:47 I can't wait till we start with like the beginning of what we do with stories and you get to tell a story and then Okay, everyone. What Rachael Jackson 59:52 do you guys have no idea how to pull us out of this ditch. Kendra Holt-Moore 59:57 We will knock on the door of death. Ian Binns 1:00:04 We're right now we're approaching the door next time we're just Adam Pryor 1:00:07 going right up to it. Yeah, Rachael Jackson 1:00:10 that was my Zach that's it. I Adam Pryor 1:00:12 got an attack that clearly the Rachael Jackson 1:00:14 death's door Yeah. Not gonna happen next time next time knocking on Adam Pryor 1:00:19 door knocking on death's door. This time, just hairs in places where they're not supposed to be.
Episode 87 For many people, pregnancy is an exciting and hopeful time, but for carriers of hereditary diseases, it can be a nightmare. For centuries, matchmakers and family historians have done their best to arrange marriages that would result in healthy offspring, but with modern genetic testing, we can take all the guesswork out of it. Couples can nearly handpick their future children and monitor every step of their development for potential problems. While there are so many opportunities for human flourishing, there are also plenty of moral and ethical quandaries to consider. When does a living tissue become a human being with rights? When does a human being take on the image of God or develop a soul? You might be surprised at what our sacred scriptures and religious traditions do and do not have to say on the matter! Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors. Zack Jackson 00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are Zack Jackson UCC pastor and Reading Pennsylvania. And before I had kids, I wished that they would inherit my thick brown hair, which I had gotten from my father and his father before them. And at least one of my children has it. Rachael Jackson 00:32 Beautiful. Rachael Jackson, Rabbi at Agoudas, Israel, congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina. And before I had a child, I wished that they would inherit a combination of my dark hair, but my husband's thick, wavy, wonderful hair. Zack Jackson 00:55 Well, as it turns out, I have two sons. And one of them has thick blond hair, and the other one has thin brown hair. So genetics, how about you how to work out for you, Rachael Jackson 01:06 so works out. So my husband's hair is a blonde with some red undertones. And his beard is, you know, definitely blonde, brown, red combination. I have for those that haven't seen pictures of me, I have extremely dark chocolate brown hair, where it looks black in some light. And our son that has just straight up watered down chocolate brown hair kind of looks like oh, maybe cappuccino or something like that. And its thickness is a combination to it's not nearly as thick and whatever, I can't think of the right adjective to describe my husband's hair. But it's also not as thin as mine, I have very fine hair. So my son's hair is not very fine. But it has a mind of its own. And that's just hilarious. And now that he's seven, I was under the impression that maybe we should start combing it or something. We hadn't really before this. combed it. And so I tried to do that the other day, and he looks at me and he's just like, I don't care. I went, Okay, do your life. I'm not gonna carry you there. That's fine. That's fine. Zack Jackson 02:31 You know, of all of the hard to believe crazy. Out of this world, complicated parts about this universe, genetics are one of the things that really blows my mind. Like it's just sexual reproduction in and of itself, that you can take the building blocks of one creature and another creature, and just like strip them down into a soup, and then make something new, that isn't like 5050. That could be any number of proportion of whatever of either one, and you have no idea what's going to come out the other side. And yet, what does come out the other side is often fairly recognizable, that you'd be like, yeah, my son really does look like me. And he's got my nervous tics. And he's my other son does not and my one son is allergic to the sun, which is not really allergic to it. It's a it's a weird short circuit in your brain where you get too much light and you sneeze. My mom had it. I have it. And one of my sons has it. But not the others. No, not the other. Rachael Jackson 03:43 Yeah, well, genetics is so bizarre, maybe that's why we'd like Legos. Right? Like imagine that, that are four base pairs that make up our DNA at that combine. One again, from a scientific standpoint, we need one male and one female in our genetics to make this happen. combined these genes and next thing you know, you get a completely different structure. But what's amazing is that it's so similar. Unlike Legos, right? Where you sort of take one person, you strip them down to their base pairs, you take the other person strip them down to their base pairs, you combine it and it looks like their child's like it looks like their results. It could have the the possibilities that it could be something completely different is amazing. Right? So when you have there's this concept of recessive gene, add dominant gene. So if you have, let's say, for example, that you have two people who have brown eyes and their child is overwhelmingly Going to then have brown eyes. But perhaps let's say the mom, her mom has blue eyes, right? So this, this would be child, this hypothetical child's grandparent has blue eyes. So there's the potential of this child to then have blue eyes. But it's such a low potential, because it is a recessive gene, not a dominant gene. And that question of what is recessive and what is dominant? And what is just, you know, not for us to decide, and it's just sort of like a grab bag. And where are these things? And do we know where they are? What are the traits? How do we find them and mapping that on to this genetic code, or the genome is absolutely fascinating. And humans have their own particular genome, fruit flies, like anything that has DNA has a genome, this is one of the things that we talked about several weeks ago, when we were talking with Professor Dan Janis, and looking at the genome of these viruses, right, so they were using RNA, and we use DNA, but it's the same sort of concept that we can figure out where these things are, and what happens if we mess with them. And, and that's where the conversation that I wanted to go today is what happens when we mess with them. So in our series, we've been talking, sort of going through the life cycle of people. So last time, we were able to talk about puberty and different ideas there. And so this week, I really wanted to focus on sort of the next stage of life, which is pregnancy and all the things that come up for people around that time of life. And a caveat, something that I feel that I, I need to say, not just that I feel like I need to say, if a person or people choose not to have children, that is their choice. And that is a perfectly good way to live. And if people choose to have one, if people choose to have 10, that is their choice. And so that's something that I also want to be very clear today that just because we're talking about this does not mean that it is the way to live in our worlds, and I feel the societal pressure that, wow, you're not really, you're only having one, what's wrong with you, or you're choosing to be child free, not to child less. And so there is nothing less about not choosing to have a child. So even if you yourself, our listeners have not had a child or choosing not to have a child, I think this conversation can still be important because it's going to bring in questions of ethics, and medical ethics. So I just I just wanted to put that out there. And also I'll be using the terms male and female to identify rather than gendered terms of woman and man. Because we recognize and we support and our allies, to our LGBTQ family, and our friends. And so we recognize that the human species needs to have male and female in order to reproduce, how a person expresses themselves and who they are gendered is not necessarily part of that conversation then. So I just wanted to add those caveats in those that understanding in our conversation today. So all of that, all of that to say, it's totally amazing that we can take DNA from two different people split it up the middle and then combine it and create another creature like another human being not a creature a human being. Zack Jackson 08:46 Not just a random, Rachael Jackson 08:47 just some random Zack Jackson 08:49 person chances Rachael Jackson 08:52 are like that question. So I, I carried my child. And so when I was pregnant with him, people would say so what are you having? And like, That's such a weird question. It's like a dinosaur. I'm having a Stegosaurus like. This is like, I don't know if Nicole has a question. Or if you ever had that question on her behalf Zack Jackson 09:14 a time people are so preoccupied with unborn fetuses, genitals, it's unsettling. Rachael Jackson 09:21 Yes. Like, what else? Do we ever talk about it? Like really? When Elsa read or, or worse? So are you going to have another? Like, when else do we casually talk about people's sex lives? Like that is literally none of your business. It would be like asking the question, so are you and your partner having unprotected sex tonight? Zack Jackson 09:45 Yeah, anytime a couple says like we're trying for another one. That's all I think is like wow, you just told me that you and your your partner are just going to have a lot of sex. Thanks for that. I didn't need to know that. Rachael Jackson 09:56 This is like somehow in our semi period in society, we're allowed to be that invasive and that open about this topic. Zack Jackson 10:07 It's someone like, So, have you thought about getting a nose job? And like, you know what this is my body? Maybe we don't talk about this right now, it seems kind of. Rachael Jackson 10:19 Right, it seems kind of not appropriate, because we're just not in that kind of relationship. And that's, that's a boundary crosser. But we, what we do we ask that question of like, so what are you having, which is a question of genitalia. And we now, in the last, I'm just gonna not go through the whole medical thing. So I'm just going to use very broad, broad decades, within the last 100 years, we've now been able to be clarified what the genitalia will be, of an of a fetus have a yet to be born fetus using ultrasound techniques, right. So plus or minus 60 years, we've been able to do this, which is pretty cool. But it doesn't really actually change anything, just FYI. doesn't doesn't change anything. But now we know. And then, within the last few decades, we've been able to do more than ultrasounds. ultrasounds give us a glimpse into what is going on. And we hopefully, focus on the genitalia. And I say hopefully, because that means everything else is fine. That means the heartbeat is going well, that means the shape of the head is forming. That means you can see the organs that are happening and forming and that the brain is going right that it's all connecting. And it's working. And if you're getting to the point where you're really excited about if it's a boy or a girl, then that means everything else is okay. And that's not always the case. That's not always the case with ultrasound. So what do we do? What do we do? But before we get to that conversation, I want to take a step back, when we're talking about recessive and dominant genes. Now we're gonna get into some odd territory to have ethnicity. So have you heard of the royal blood disease? Zack Jackson 12:31 In royal blood disease, like in Russia? Oh, in Russia, are we talking about like, the Czar's that are so inbred that they have all these medical problems. They had a whole there was a whole stick on that on 30 rock for for a while. Rachael Jackson 12:50 Okay. So there's there's two, there's two royal families in the European continent that are pretty famous for medical issues. One is sort of the Russian side, which is Haemophilia. Which is sort of a royal blood disease royal, because a lot of the Royals had it. And the other is the Hapsburgs where they were so inbred that it caused massive issues. And by the end of the line, the person was sterile, right, there was just so many genetic issues that the person was sterile and couldn't then have any more of their own children. And there there went the end of the line. Right, so the Habsburgs and that, so that's an inbreeding. But there's other ways of of Ashwin is the way I'm looking for, of being in relation ship in a small group without having these dramatic inbreeding issues. One of those that's fairly common that I'm mostly intimately familiar with, is the Ashkenazi Jewish list. And the reason that that exists, is Ashkenazi Jews or central or Eastern European Jews. And for a very, very long time, it was illegal punishable by death to marry a Jewish person. And it was illegal punishable by death to convert to Judaism. So what do you do with our population? Right, they just breed with each other. Luckily, the population was large enough that it didn't cause these massive inbreeding issues that we see in in some cultures or and then the Hapsburgs. But that has caused some genetic issues and genetic traits. And we know that now. And one of the things so there is this idea of genetic screening between two people and to see what is their genetic recessive disorders recessive meaning they themselves are its carrier status, right? It's, you carry this gene doesn't affect you, but you hold it. And you could pass it along to your child. And the question is, if you're holding it, and your partner is holding it, your child's 25% gonna get it. Right. Like that's. So if you're holding something and your partner is holding something, but neither one of you have it, your child will have a 25% chance of getting it, Zack Jackson 15:30 and then a 75% chance of being a holder if they don't get it. Rachael Jackson 15:34 But 50% chance of being a holder and a 25% chance of not even carrying if not even being a carrier. Got it? Beautiful, right? That's sort of how these things work of all genes being equal. That's how it would work. Well, the Ashkenazi Jewish population has around 100, pretty nasty diseases, some less nasty than others, right? Most are achy, but not traumatic or disastrous. So what we do is if we have an ethnically, and this is where I'm where I'm saying, It's getting a little sticky, because we recognize that people are people. And every, you know, diversity is amazing. And we want people to just love and live and Yay. But the reality is that if you have and that also, I just want to say that when a person converts to Judaism, you're Jewish. But genetically doesn't have the same gene pool. Zack Jackson 17:01 You mentioned Ashkenazi Jews. Yes. That's not the only group. And before I met you, I didn't know this. So I imagine a lot of our listeners also don't know, these distinctive genetic groups. Rachael Jackson 17:16 Thank you. I does, I'm so absorbed in that world that I forget that Thank you. So Ashkenazi Jews showed up in central Eastern Europe, plus or minus 1000 years ago. Right? So we'll just use that timeframe. Where else were Jews in the world about 1000 years ago, in what's considered the ancient Near East or the Middle East, or however you want to understand? Israel, Egypt, that part of the world, right? And then in the 1500s 1492, not talking Columbus talking, the expulsion of Jews, right, and these are Sephardic Jews. And that's the, that's one of the other terms, right? Sephardic Jews are those that come from Spain, or the Iberian Peninsula to be more accurate. But 500 years ago, they were kicked out of there, and they had to go somewhere. And so where did they go? They went to the Ottoman Empire or South America. So those are Sephardic Jews, as the primary differences. There's also different rights are it e Yemenite, its Iraqi, etc, those are much smaller populations, mostly coming from a mix of Sephardic and the local populations. So even the Jews that are living in India, and those were, most of them were considered Sephardic Jews, right? Because prior to the prior to the expulsion in 1492, their families came from Spain. So when we look at a genetic, when we look at from a genetic standpoint, it's really two groups of people, Sephardic, and Ashkenazi, Zack Jackson 19:03 and the Arctic have had more intermingling outside of their own group, BINGO, Rachael Jackson 19:09 BINGO, because Spain and Portugal was like, get out of here. And so where did they go? They spread. Right? They went to lots of different places, and they intermingled. So their genetic their gene pool was much larger. Ashkenazi, not so much, tiny little shuttles. And the entire shuttle would be picked up and move to a different place. Zack Jackson 19:36 And so being Christians are awful, Rachael Jackson 19:38 right? Zack Jackson 19:40 Historically, I think that's pretty uncontested. Yeah. So Rachael Jackson 19:44 the Jews living in those regions, then we're had a much different experience in the Sephardic Jews. So their ability to find someone to marry was challenging. Without going into all of the details of how not quite accurate This was Fiddler on the Roof. If anyone has seen that one of the challenges that tavia has is he has to marry off his daughters. And there aren't any. There aren't any suitable Jews in their city. Right. So where does he has to find them from elsewhere? Right that that that kind of challenge of like, Okay, I've got seven daughters. What do I do? And they they brought in a matchmaker. Yay. Right? And if no one's got the song, right, Matchmaker, matchmaker maker, find me a Kashmir catch. And so they did the matchmakers job and this is getting us back to the genetic question. The matchmakers job was not just to match them with someone who could produce children, someone who could keep a roof over their their heads and, you know, happiness and love sure, but that's that's a new issue. But the matchmakers job way back when, right pre pre maternity was to know this family, did they have any issues? And were there lots of issues? Did they lose children not miscarriage? But did did their children die at young ages? And knowing that piece of information and saying Ah, and I have a family over here, right? This, this, this bride's family her, her family has had all these little graves, these little baby graves, and this groom's family, his family has all these little graves for children, do not combine them. Right. And they just know that, again, they didn't understand genetics, but they knew that there was something in this family's blood that caused these issues. And if the same issues arose in someone else's gene pool or someone else's bloodline, you don't combine those people. So that have that's one of the roles of the Ashkenazi Jewish matchmaker was to make sure that those genetic issues sort of stopped with the families as much as they could. So what we do now, is we actually do genetic pre testing, test the adults. So Zack, if I can ask the personal question, did you and Nicole have this question or wrestle with this? Or did anyone even bring this up to you to have your own genetics tested? Zack Jackson 22:41 know, a little, that would have been so strange and invasive, and no one would have ever thought to do that. Rachael Jackson 22:51 Okay. And after you had conceived, did that even come up? Zack Jackson 22:56 There were no I know. They they know. Like, maybe a little bit when we're thinking about like, well, heart disease runs in both of our families. So we just need to make sure we're eating right. But like, that's, that's kind of, Rachael Jackson 23:15 right, right. For our segment of the population, we actually talk about pre genetic testing, where we say okay, if you two want if you're both genetically Ashkenazi Jewish, let's get you pre tested and see if you're a carrier, see if this is a recessive gene. One of the most famous ones that people might have heard about is Tay Sachs. And Tay Sachs is a neurodegenerative disease, basically, where there's a piece of fat, right that the brain just turns to fat, rather than being a muscle. And because it's a muscle, or should be a muscle, it controls things. And starting around six months old, it just stops. So if you've ever been around a child, an infant who's about six months old, they're not. They're just starting to develop any ability to have language, right, just as an ooze and whatever, just somehow forming things. They're just beginning to really sit up and hold themselves, right, but they're not really mobile, right? They're not crawling, they're not walking, but they're there but you can just plop them down on the floor and be like, okay, here's your key ring, have go to town, right, those plastic keys. And starting around that age with Tay Sachs, that's when it starts to become degenerative to the point of losing all muscle control, going blind, going deaf, having zero physical ability and eventually suffocating with lungs and most children die by the age of five, if not sooner, and it is a horrific death, the the dying, the degeneration is traumatic and the death itself is awful. Well, that's a sex. And that's one of several diseases that are like that. So we suggest, and that I think I have to double check with the numbers are, there's been much more intermarriage recently, which is good for the gene pool. Not gonna say how it is for the religion, but it's good for the gene pool where the numbers are going down. But I one point I looked at was something like one and 21 and Trey were carriers of Ashkenazi Yeah, huge. And if if anyone has been to an ultra orthodox enclave, there is a lot more infant graves than the general population for all these different genetic issues. Zack Jackson 25:53 So are people getting people are getting tested before they get married? Rachael Jackson 25:56 Correct. So they can see if they're right, are you a carrier? And if you're not a carrier, okay, then Hmm. Zack Jackson 26:06 I like if, if you were to get tested before you got married, and you found that you're both carriers, right? Like, would that change your decision to get married at all? Rachael Jackson 26:19 What do you think? What would you do? Zack Jackson 26:24 I think, well, if I'm back when I was getting ready to get married, I think I could have found out that Nicole was, you know, secretly, a Martian, or she had a disease where her hair would catch on fire every 10 years or something. And I would still probably if married her and be like, well figure it out down the line, I don't care that you've been cursed by a witch or something. That's futures x problem. Right? Right. Because has Zach was puppy dog love, and so I wouldn't have cared later down the line, though. You know, as time went on, and we thought about kids and thought, like, that's just gonna be, that's gonna be so dangerous, potentially. I don't know if I want to do that. And then maybe we'll have felt regret. I don't know. This is this is all brand new thought experiments to me. Rachael Jackson 27:13 So let's keep going with that thought experiment. Right? So let's say you do get married. Because love triumphs and love is amazing. And kids don't make marriage, right. Marriage is its own entity. And so you can say, Yes, we choose to start a family. Turns out, we don't want to do that to us. Right. Very few people, I think would say, Oh, I'm a carrier and my partner's a carrier. Let's try it. Those are good odds. No, those are not good odds. Those are bad odds, because the result is so bad. So the answer is no, let's not do this, quote unquote, the natural way? Well, let's say you're just so tied to seeing those ticks in your kids to knowing that your kid is like you, genetically, that you're just tied to that idea. So what are some options? Right, exactly. You know, what, what are your options? Zack Jackson 28:17 No, I would have no idea. I mean, if both partners are carriers, yeah. I mean, we don't have the technology to like, isolate and splice out those Sure Rachael Jackson 28:26 do. What should we do? Zack Jackson 28:29 No, we do not. Rachael Jackson 28:31 Here's what we do have Stop it. We have the ability to create zygotes where you take a sperm and you take an egg in IVF. Right. So you make the woman like, okay, so just a little bit of medical technology. And sorry, I'm dominating the conversation. Take a little bit of technology. Zack Jackson 28:49 I glad it's not me dominating the conversation about pregnancy and, and Jewish genetics. Very appropriate that way. Thanks. So Turkey, Rachael Jackson 29:01 generally speaking, a woman oscillates and yields one egg per monthly cycle. Right. And then if things if, if intercourse happens at that time, and everything is right, then there's pregnancy that's able to happen. But you don't want to just take one at a time when you're trying to do IVF. You want a whole bunch, so you just like load the woman up with hormones and all these other things. And then you go in and you grab a whole bunch of eggs at the same time. It's like, I got 10. Zack Jackson 29:38 I can't help but imagine like a farmer, right? We're doing picking chicken eggs, 29:43 bacon, chicken eggs. That's right. Zack Jackson 29:45 This is all very scientific, Rachael Jackson 29:47 tinier, tiny little pinchers, right. You take all of these, and you take the sperm and you take you take a sperm and you're just like, Hi, meet your partner, and they come together in a petri dish. Or test to write test two babies. And we've had that technology 40 ish years, right? And now what but the sperm and the egg get together and you're just like, Oh, it's so beautiful. Let's make more of us. And they go from that one to two to four to eight and then pause. you pause everything at eight cells. Zack Jackson 30:20 What do you mean, you pause it, Rachael Jackson 30:21 you stop the reactions from continuing you stop that. You freeze them. Like I don't, I don't know the science behind it. Zack Jackson 30:30 Like actually freezing them in and like it like Rachael Jackson 30:33 you just like you put it like you put it in spaces. That's not the right word. But like, you just stop the reaction. Zack Jackson 30:40 This is all science fiction to me. So Rachael Jackson 30:41 you go. And then you take one of those eight cells. You do this, lots of sperm, lots of eggs, and you take one of those eight cells, and you look at it and you say, Alright, this is going to tell me all of the genetics of the future fetus and child. Oh, yeah. And you can say, Ah, this child will have Tay Sachs, this child will have cystic fibrosis, this child will have brown eyes, brown hair, generally be tall will have no heart disease will be male. And 1/8 of a set 1/8 of this will tell you that and then you say, ah, I've taken a look. I know that this one doesn't have a six it doesn't have any genetic disorders. Fantastic. let it continue to grow. Let me pop it in your uterus, or a surrogate unit uterus if yours is not a good place to grow things. And then you grow the child's and you're fine. 31:42 Helmets off. Zack Jackson 31:44 So wait. Rachael Jackson 31:46 I'm blowing Zach's mine. Okay, so I know that I know that audio and Zach's head is like literally flooded? Zack Jackson 31:53 I know, we should have been recording the video and smacking into my microphone and everything. Yeah. Okay. So you get a bunch of bunch of fertilized eggs. And, and then the doctor says to you, all right, we've got 16 here, and seven of them are with are not going to have k sex? Do you then get the choice? Like, do you want a boy? Do you want a girl? Do you want to tall kid a short kid? Or are they sequencing the full genome are just looking for those markers? Rachael Jackson 32:27 And that's where this becomes an ethical question. Where are we asking? We I believe I Rachel believe that when we say I don't want the trauma. And I know I'm using that word again. And the tragedy of bringing a life into this world only to see it suffer and die. And we are preventing that. And that is amazing. And I completely support that. I think we should use our technology in those ways. The question then becomes, how much information do you get? Because yes, generally speaking, when you're doing the Royal you, when you're doing these investigations of the genome, it's all found, you know, what gender you know what sex it is, you know, what? hair color and all of these other things that we have genetic markers for, you know what those are, and they test for them all. And so you can have this picture of what this child could look like. And so the question becomes, okay, now you have four, three are male, and one is female. Which do you implant? Who gets that choice? Should anyone get that? Drake's? What do you think? Zack Jackson 34:14 This is where it'll be really helpful to have more guests on the show. Rachael Jackson 34:19 Put the pressure off of you. Zack Jackson 34:24 Yeah, right, take the pressure off of me because it's somehow feels different when we're talking about minimizing suffering and death and weeding out something like Tay Sachs, or something else that would inevitably end in suffering and death. And then there's like the next level down, where it's like this could potentially cause suffering and death. So like markers for heart disease, or diabetes or something like that. That is may cause suffering down the line. But it's it's kind of your baseline average it sucks to be human suffering. And then there's like things that won't really affect that. But maybe the family ones that are more cosmetic, you know about height and, and weight and hair color, hair color, eye color, things like that. And then there's like this whole other category of things that are like, would cause social suffering, right? Like, you might say, Wow, it is much better to be born a man in this day and age. So if I have a choice, I'm going to raise somebody who's going to be able to get ahead easier in the world, and be like, I'm worried. So we're gonna have a son to pass on our name and get a good job, we'll make him tall, tall, dark, handsome, as best as we can. And set him up for success. And then that feels like a different ballgame that feels like custom humans and but not custom humans in the way of like designing a genome and then spitting out something. But custom humans in a sort of process of elimination, wasteful kind of a way that then feels like if we're fertilizing a bunch of eggs, and only keeping the healthy ones, because we're trying to minimize suffering and death, for some reason that feels morally better than creating a bunch just so that we can find the one that's the best, that feels a little more shady. For all of the nerds out here, my my brain is immediately going to all of those hours I spent breeding Pokemon and Pokemon field recently on switch, and putting two in there catching an egg checking to see how strong it is, and then releasing it into the wild, hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of strays running around the world right now because I wanted to find the perfect one. And now when I kept and trained, and I even in a video game I felt a little dirty about Rachael Jackson 37:09 that's good. I think that means your ethics is kind of in check. But those are the questions that people face every time they go through this process. Zack Jackson 37:21 Yeah. And so then created, they're not intentionally, Rachael Jackson 37:25 right. And then the question becomes, who gets to decide if there is a decision to be made? Again, so let's let's just agree that the suffering the immediate and error, irreversible or blanking on the word, guaranteed suffering and death, that were just that those, those are just not going to be implanted? Right? We just, we just, that's part of the reason for doing this, right? We're just saying, okay, no, but now we've got four healthy ones. And let's keep it at a reasonable number for that you implant to now and then you can have a sibling later and implant to in a couple of years. Right. But if you have more than that, like, who's making the decision? Is it the parents? Is it the doctor who's doing the implantation? Is it the geneticist who found this information? Right, so from my perspective, we can we have to have layers of trust and layers of ignorance. We where the trust is we trust the geneticists finds the ones that would cause suffering, and said, these ones, these ones aren't going to be good, right? To use a very subjective term. These five are great. And I'm not going to tell you anything more about it. And then the doctor, the implanter, and the parent say, Okay, I've got five good eggs. How many do you want to try now? And that's all that that's all they know. It creates a barrier, but then we'd need to check and balance with the geneticist to make sure that the genetic so then the geneticist doesn't have any say into Oh, well did. The geneticist really likes girls that the geneticist really likes brown hair, right there, that's what's good or bad. Zack Jackson 39:22 Right? And then years down the road, there's gonna be some big breaking story about this geneticist who was like a white supremacists, right. patriarchy guy who's been intentionally implanting only men Rachael Jackson 39:36 for why they're only boys, right? The rest are bad, right? So there has to be some sort of check in that situation of what's identified and someone to then audit using a bookkeeping term, right to audit what this geneticist is doing. So in Judaism, the answer is at this point, right because we have questions and answers called Holocaust. response and response basically says, if it's going to be suffering and death, don't implant them and just destroy the embryos. Other than that, anything other than that heart disease, Down syndrome, right, diabetes, things that just naturally occur that might make it harder in society. No, you don't get to abort, or you don't get to choose to not implant those ones for those reasons. You say, yeah, I've had enough kids. The difference in Judaism, which I personally disagree with some of this is from a gendered standpoint, or a sex standpoint, where if you already have two boys, you're allowed to choose a female one. Or if you already have two females, you're allowed to choose a male one, to ensure a balance in your nuclear family. So that's, that's sort of where the Holocaust rests. Zack Jackson 41:06 Okay, it feels like a concession that someone made, Rachael Jackson 41:08 right. But it's, it's exactly that you get a little bit more, because if you if if this if you're both carriers, and you want to have multiple children, and you're like, Ah, well, I've already had two boys. Make sure that this one's a girl, then they can. Mm hmm. So, but now let's, let's get forward on your ethics. Let's say you don't go through that testing, like the majority of people don't. And you're pregnant. Yay. Yay. And you have an ultrasound and something's not Yay. And they ask the question, do you want an amniocentesis? Or do you want some other genetic testing of the fetus and amniocentesis is basically where they go into the belly, and into the amniotic fluid, take some of the fluid out and test that fluid, which means that they're puncturing the amniotic sac, which is basically the baby's life. Yeah, right. So if they puncture it, and something goes wrong, there's a 1% chance of miscarriage at that point, which is a decently high percentage, for a question mark, right, of what's going to come from this. So what do you do then? Zack Jackson 42:24 defer 100% to my wife. I feel like with most of these decisions that have to do with childbearing and, and the creation of life, that these decisions should be made by the one carrying the life and fostering the life much more than the person who had a little bit of say in the beginning. But I think at the end, I know what what she would say would be, okay, well, what what are we going to do with the information we get? And are we considering terminating the pregnancy? If we find that it's something awful? And if that's the case, then it's worth taking the chance? If we're not going to terminate the pregnancy, that it's not worth taking the chance? And we'll see what happens. Rachael Jackson 43:21 Yeah, exactly. I think that's wonderful way of looking at it. If you ask the question, what do you do with the answer? If the answer is nothing, right, that you're doing nothing with the answer that you receive, then why ask the question Zack Jackson 43:35 is just for peace of mind. Rachael Jackson 43:39 Great, like, why? Right? Nobody asked that question. Nobody had the ability to ask that question. 100 years ago, right, didn't have that ability. So why is the question now if you're not going to do anything about it? which then gets us to the religious side of things. So Zack, if you could tell us about the various stages of what life is like, when does life happen? When does a soul happen? When does like in your tradition? When do those pieces happen? Zack Jackson 44:21 Well, the various strands of Christianity are all over the place, as is true with almost anything. I came from a church that taught very strictly that life, human life begins at conception, at the moment that the sperm enters the egg and they do their little dance, and there is a single cell. Or maybe when that single spouse splits into two, that's when life exists. That's when there is a soul present. That's when this is a human being and anything you do to That human being in that womb, that would be equated to what you would have done to a person, an adult human. Essentially. We were that church who protested at Planned Parenthood and had awful giant banners of aborted fetuses and just leave without those people. And I'm horrified now. That tradition I'm in now, the United Church of Christ is kind of work. congregational denominations, every church is allowed to do their own thing. But from a national standpoint, they would say that life begins when a child is on their own, when a child is out of the mother, and is able to live by their own means. Rachael Jackson 45:56 Almost a medical definition then, right? Yes, is it it's a viable, that it's viable, Zack Jackson 46:01 that it's viable on its own. So after, after birth, essentially. So we're not talking like, you know, 36 weeks or whatever, but like, after the child is out on their own, then they are a, a life, and we just, we don't bother ourselves with the question of souls, entering bodies and whatnot. One person, I pointed out that up to 14 days, a, an embryo can still become twins. And so after 14 days is when the soul enters the body, because then you'd need two souls, if it was going to be twins. And so that's the moment that it happens. And when I heard that, it said, I thought to myself, this whole thing feels very arbitrary. Like, we are really trying to shove very ancient, almost mystical ideas about how the physical and the spiritual intermingle in what makes humans special from animals. And we are trying to shove that now into scientific understandings of life. And it gets messy, and then we pretend like it's not messy, and that makes it nastier. Rachael Jackson 47:32 Is there a differentiation of something which is alive, and something which is a human life? Zack Jackson 47:44 modern progressive Christians would say, Yes. That though, like a tissue in the uterus, is alive on its on its own, it is also so heavily connected to the mother, that it is, in some sense, a part of it. And is is just is not a human being as itself an autonomous being. Just definitionally, I mean, my own perspective, is that I try not to have a perspective because it's not my body. And I would rather listen to the people who have those bodies and have those experiences to tell me what is happening within them. Rachael Jackson 48:31 Although I will push you on that and say that, especially as a, as a man, being an ally, is also important. And so to understand where your ally ship feels in accordance with your morality is important. But I appreciate that I applaud the idea that the person who's making these decisions as the person going through these decisions themselves, Zack Jackson 48:59 it also helps that I no longer have a, an individual theology of a human soul. Which then kind of changes a lot of the conversation. Like if you believe that there is an immaterial spiritual thingness that resides within you, and without you, that enters into you, or is formed into you, and then once you die is freed, to continue its everlasting life in whatever afterlife, like that idea, which honestly, is a bit more Hindu than biblical. This is the Atman we're talking about more than what the Bible would talk about as a spirit, a soul, a life a person or whatever. And I mean, when I say Bible, I mean both Christian and Hebrew Bibles. A lot is read into it. I think what the the the Christian Bible Promises is a resurrection of humanity. That the dead ur dead, ur dead are dead. And that the promises not that they die and then are washed away in some ethereal state. But the promise is that the God who remembers them will resurrect them and give them new life here on earth with a physical Earth and a physical garden and trees and wildlife and all those things, there's not really a promise other than in a couple of isolated places, in Paul's writings that talk about being freed from this mortal coil. There's not really a whole lot of indication of an individual eternal soul that is present with in a person, despite the fact that it's so present within Christian theology historically, it's not really biblical. And so if you no longer have that hinderance theologically speaking, then this question becomes a lot more scientific. Like if that if that embryo that is growing into a fetus, as growing into a child within the womb is does not have an eternal essence to it. It doesn't have a them that is them that is then that is them yet, then it's an entirely different ethical question, then it is that thing, a, a divine, a carrier of the Divine? Rachael Jackson 51:23 Yeah, that's beautiful. Thank you for, for adding to that I've not really thought about it in in those ways. That also Zack Jackson 51:31 might get me in trouble. So I'm sorry, all of you who are listening, who are a member of my church, don't tell anyone. All three of you. Rachael Jackson 51:42 And I'll just say, gay Judaism, big Zack Jackson 51:51 man, Rachael Jackson 51:52 because we basically have this idea that there are so we don't just stick to the Bible. The Bible just influences other conversations such as the Tom Budd, which is really just 2700 pages of people arguing with each other. And what does this mean? And what does this mean, and going on from there, and in these pages, one of those examples, basically says, there's this, this I got, I just got, I just got to actually share the share the line, right, so we've all heard, and a hammer Robbie's code, right? An eye for an eye, a tooth for tooth and iron for a lar, or a limb for a limb a life for a life. And there's so many ways of answering What does that mean? You know, it's like God's revenge. And then the answer is, actually, it's proportionality. And another is actually it's just talking five different kinds of damages and using the body as an example of that. Yeah, that's that's like, Torah gymnastics right there. So we, we still have that, right. So if you keep that in mind, and that that's written down in the Bible, right, written down in the Old Testament, and then there's this line in Exodus 21. Exodus 2122. For anyone that would like to check on me. It says, If men strive together, right, so you got a bar brawl going on? Right? just let's just set the scene. I'm just gonna quote the whole thing. You got a bar brawl? Right? The bar brawl happens. And this woman comes out and says, Come on, has been Time to go home. Like you got to get work in the morning. She's just like, walking up there and she's pregnant. And and like a fight ensues and the non husband accidentally kicks her and hurts her. And she miscarries. Right. And that's it. Like nothing else. She's not even bruised in the ribs. She doesn't have a scrape on her knee. She just miscarries caveat parents medical aside, it's not just a miscarriage, it can be very traumatic. I am so sorry if that's ever happened to you. I honor that challenge. That's not the point of this conversation. But I want to recognize that miscarriages are not just miscarriages. Close parentheses. So she's fine otherwise, physically. So then they say, Oh, hey, you damaged my fetus. You owe me money. The person who did the damages What is he supposed to do? And it says, yet no harm follow, he shall surely be fined according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him and he shall pay as the judge determines because the only harm came to the loss of the fetus, not to her, but it's in the same same category as a limb for a limb alive. For a life, but it was a miscarriage. And the person who caused it is not paying with any body part, including his life from that lie and there is the not so far leap of, therefore the fetus is not a life. Hmm. It had potential hay, that could have been a boy that he could have worked in the farm and you owe me for that damages, you hurt my cow, you hurt my property, and therefore you owe me for the damages of my property. But it is not a life. And it's from that line that more than that, that our understanding of So when is this life thing happening. And there are other lines that I won't go into the gruesome nature of what they talk about, basically, it says up to 40 days, it's like water. So 40 days, which, scientifically speaking, you know, it's about six weeks. So if anything happens before six weeks, whatever, like, it's just like water, like there's literally nothing else, or we're not even going to do anything if if a miscarriage or an abortion, a spontaneous or an intentional miscarriage happens, great man gonna do anything about that. And then comes that other period of it's still really attached to the female that it is living within as a parasite. Loving pregnant, totally a parasite, Zack Jackson 56:50 your bones, Rachael Jackson 56:51 Oh, my God. Again, loved it was not was not did not feel like Zack Jackson 56:58 my calcium child, Rachael Jackson 57:00 and my blood supply and my brain cells, please go on. Thanks for that. That it is not considered a nephesh it is not considered a soul a life until the moment that the entire head is outside of the body. At that point, when the entire head is outside of the body, then the life of the person delivering it and the life of this child, this infant are now equal. Up until that point, it is considered as a limb of the mother. So if you imagine a limb, and you're just like, this limb has become gangrenous, I must get rid of it. Okay, let's get rid of the limb. If your life is in danger, because this limb is going to cause you death, then you get rid of it. It is considered and so using that language that it is as a limb, I think really changes, who owns it? Who makes the decision? And what can happen to it. I know this is all new for you, do you care to react? Zack Jackson 58:25 And it sounds like it's being treated like a person who would trample on seedlings. And the question then is do you are you then guilty of destroying my tomatoes? Or just with the things that would one day bear tomatoes? Yeah, and that's a distinction I hadn't really considered. And coming from a place like that. Yeah, Exodus. That was, I came out of left field. Because we in the evangelical world, we would often quote from especially from Psalms from some of the more poetic places of you who formed my parts. my innermost being you knew me from in my mother's womb on all of these, this language of personal autonomy before birth and intentionality of creation. And all of those were used to, to give autonomy to the thing before it's born. So it's really interesting to hear that the people who wrote those books, interpret them differently than the people who inherited them. Which is so often the case so are doing Christians and Jews. Rachael Jackson 59:44 So So holding that holding that idea of of imbuing all of these characteristics into something that is not yet born. Here's a piece from the mission of then that I'll share with you and this is trigger warning. It's a little bit graphic and used as hyperbole, okay? Because they didn't actually enforce capital punishment. But this is using that example to highlight and underscore what they're saying. So, in the case of a pregnant woman who is taken by the court to be executed, the court does not wait to execute her until after she gives birth. Rather, she is killed immediately. But with regard to a woman who is taken to be executed, while sitting in the throes of labor, on the on the birthing stool, the court shall wait to execute her. And then the following conversation is, well, isn't it obvious that the court executes a pregnant woman rather than waiting? After all, it's just a part of her body, the fetus is considered her property? If so, the courts should wait until she gives birth before executing her and not cause him to lose the fetus. And this is no actually this is not taken into account at all. So who gets so a woman who is pregnant, who is meant to be murdered by the state right? capital punishment? Yes. Up until the point where she is in active labor, on the birth. And so for those of you that are aren't so familiar with midwifery, on the birthing stool means the woman is pushing. She's not just in labor, like she is pushing, and that baby's head is like coming out. Only until that point, they can execute her up until them Zack Jackson 1:01:40 worth noting, too, that the mission is not a modern Rachael Jackson 1:01:44 document. Thank you. Yes, the mission was written down approximately 1900 years ago. Yeah. So contemporary with other Christian with Christian sources that might be interpreting this in a completely different way. So that's sort of the Jewish way of understanding this. Zack Jackson 1:02:03 Okay. Interesting, though, that it's considered a part of the mother's body and not the father's property, as I would imagine a patriarchal society would want to do that, like, don't execute her until she's given birth, because that's that child is my property is how I would imagine them back then, to be thinking, but Rachael Jackson 1:02:19 no, and that was that was the question that came out in the gamar, which was written about 200 years later, like, wait a minute, it's his property, he should get a say, right, he doesn't. And it's like, actually, it's not his property on till it comes out. Zack Jackson 1:02:33 Wow. So 2000 years ago, there were people saying that a woman's body is it's her body, her choice? Yeah. And Rachael Jackson 1:02:42 it's her body. And who gets to choose? She does? Hmm. Yeah. Zack Jackson 1:02:51 Well, the early Roman Christians got real weird about sex and REL controlling about their patriarchy. And that really went a long way into informing what Christianity in Europe would develop as for the next couple 1000 years, and we are still recovering a lot from from that. And so it's actually kind of refreshing to hear that contemporaries of early Christians, and probably some early Christians as well. We're Reading these verses and thinking about life in these ways. Rachael Jackson 1:03:23 Yeah. So when we're thinking about life in these ways, I think it's really important for us to recognize that it's not so clear cut, that these are difficult choices, that there's no easy answers, there are no, frankly, actual answers that everyone can follow. It's right. It's not math. It's not two plus two equals four, it's that every situation is unique and of itself, and the people who are actually impacted should be the one to be making these decisions, not somebody else. And I'll just sort of use this platform to also say that lawyers and politicians have no place in the gynecological office at all, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever. They don't. They don't ever have a place that I think the only people that even dare to have a place in there is the person whose body it is their medical practitioner, and their partner. Those are the people that get a say, and no one else Zack Jackson 1:04:37 in that order, Rachael Jackson 1:04:38 in that order, in that order, until we come up with some other way of reproducing in that order. Yeah. So go support Planned Parenthood. Go yell at your politicians who are not choosing this who are not recognizing that and there's a few things that I'll just say that I'm going to put in the show notes. Because for those of you that have not had the experience of having yourself or a loved one or a person in your circle of concern, go through an abortion to have to make that choice. It's really easy to assign blame. And it's really easy to say what you would have done, but you've never been in those shoes. And anyone considering that choice is not taking it lightly. It's and so I just want to dispel that it's, it's never used as a birth control option. It's never used as a ploy of oops, I just forgot, well, let me just go down the street and have an abortion, right? There's no, there's no casual this to anyone that's had to make this decision. All the more. So the later in a pregnancy, this decision has to be made, the more you've heard felted kick or heard its heartbeat, or watched your own body change to accommodate this. That is not a choice that anyone wants to make. So I will be including in the show notes, some stories of people who've had to make those choices, and how they've, how they've dealt with it. Oh, I know that kind of took a serious turn. This isn't quite where we're going. Zack Jackson 1:06:25 But I think one excellent place to land. Rachael Jackson 1:06:28 And when we're talking about ethics, I think that that's part of our conversation is who gets to make these decisions. When we're when we're speaking ethics. And when we look at medical ethics, part of the part of the list is do no harm. Personal autonomy and resources. Right fair justice and fairness and those ways. So yeah, Zack Jackson 1:07:01 thank you for leading us in this discussion that I'm I'm so glad it was you. And that the fact that there were so few of us here today meant that you had the space to explore that a little bit further. Rachael Jackson 1:07:15 No thank you for doing that. And listeners please please, please tell us your your your questions. Give us your questions. Give us your your experiences that you're feeling comfortable enough to share, give us your opinions, right tell us engage us with this conversation because it's it's even more meaningful, the more we hear from you
Episode 86 There is nothing more natural than sex. It is literally the reason why you exist! Yet despite that, we seem to have a really hard time talking about it. Our experiences with sex-ed are vastly dissimilar. Some of us learned about the biology and mechanics of sex in school while others learned of the moral horrors of "improper" sex in our religious settings. With such varied approaches and experiences with sex-ed, surely there are good ways to impart scientifically sound and spiritually uplifting lessons to our youth so that they can make healthy, informed decisions about their own bodies. How should we talk about sex? Who should be doing the talking? Is sex-ed just a clever ploy by the banana lobby to sell more bananas? Let's talk about it! Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis Show Notes What is sex ed, from planned parenthood https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/for-educators/what-sex-education List of resources for sex positivity: https://sexpositivefamilies.com/10-best-sex-ed-resources-for-families/ Sexuality from the UCC: https://www.ucc.org/justice_sexuality-education/ Consent is yes means yes; video on making the analogy to serving hot tea https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZwvrxVavnQ National Sexuality Education Standards https://siecus.org/resources/national-sexuality-education-standards/?fbclid=IwAR3lyhfcNyOc_bwS0pWvxk54DIqdrAHwbJqV4iXSgh3DZAOwyLkRw_p4ITM Religious Institute: it is ideal for exploring our understanding of gender, sexuality, reproductive justice http://religiousinstitute.org/resource/educational-resources/ ObGyn: Is Science Anti-Transgender? 18min video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEhis4L4ohY Male and female are binary, but people aren't | Riley J. Dennis 18min video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2MEFj8q6rg Sex ed and sexual minorities (not cis/het) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7986966/ Legislature issues: https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/breaking-2021-becomes-record-year-for-anti-transgender-legislation The basics is that trans kids are being attacked by the government in a pretty atrocious way. The FL law that allows coaches to look at a child's genitals if they suspect they might be trans, for example, is one of the more disgusting acts... And could easily mean an increase in sexual assault of kids, cis and trans, but goodness me if we get a trans girl who likes soccer! At any rate, some of these bills are related to education and some aren't. That they're all out there also just speaks to the message that kids, who already often don't live through adolescence, are being given about their gender by the government and our society for allowing it to happen. HPV (what is it/vaccine) https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/about-hpv.html Initiative to reduce teen pregnancy https://www.shiftnc.org/initiatives/gaston-youth-connected How we're failing our students: https://nursing.usc.edu/blog/americas-sex-education/ Sex ed around the world: https://www.studyinternational.com/news/sex-education/ Sex ed in EU compared to US https://archive.attn.com/stories/7020/sex-education-europe-compared-to-united-states
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
