Podcast appearances and mentions of Nicholas Christakis

Are your choices really your own — or are they quietly shaped by the people around you? Nicholas Christakis joins Igor and Charles to reveal the hidden power of social networks, from the surprising spread of kindness and cooperation to the ripple effects that shape our health, decisions, and even our wisdom. Igor uncovers the invisible social forces influencing our daily lives, Nicholas shares how our deep-rooted instincts for love, friendship, and teaching have shaped human civilization, and Charles considers how tapping into these instincts could help us build stronger, wiser communities. Welcome to Episode 64. Special Guest: Nicholas Christakis.

Dr. Nicholas Christakis is a Sterling Professor of Social and Natural Science at Yale. He is known for his research on the influence of social networks in determining behaviors and health phenomena in human populations. He explores how social factors affect biological and social functioning, illustrating that behaviors like smoking, happiness, and obesity can spread through social ties. Christakis also delves into the biological and evolutionary basis for why humans form social networks and how these structures affect individuals and societies. He joins Nick for a conversation about his work, particularly the insight in his recent book, Blueprint.✨Join us on Patreon https://patreon.com/psychologyis✅ Early access to ad-free videos - No more skipping ads!✅ Your name in end credits of main full length videos, including Psychology Is Podcast videos✅ Unlock our community and direct chat

Transforme seus resultados: https://empreendendonoreino.com/negocios-frutiferos/Você está sendo influenciado o tempo todo! Descubra como proteger sua mente e alinhar suas conexões com os valores do Reino. Baseado no estudo de influências de Nicholas Christakis e James Fowler, Dedé Melo compartilha insights poderosos do livro 'O Poder das Conexões' e da Bíblia, revelando como as pessoas e os ambientes ao nosso redor moldam nossos pensamentos, sentimentos e resultados. Aprenda a identificar boas influências, afastar más companhias e imitar comportamentos que apontam para Cristo. Não perca esta reflexão transformadora!00:00 - Introdução: Você está sendo influenciado00:21 - O poder das conexões e o livro "O Poder das Conexões"01:34 - A importância de boas influências02:48 - Selecionando influências positivas04:17 - Imitando influências que seguem Cristo06:40 - Evitando influências negativas07:50 - O poder transformador das conexões09:39 - Resultados e estilo de vida alinhados às influências10:46 - Convite para a Tribo de Empreendedores do Reino

The microbiome, the network of tens of trillions of microbes that live in and on our bodies, helps us digest food and protects us from diseases. And depending on what species of bacteria you have, your microbiome could impact your stress response, decision-making, and how likely you are to develop arthritis and depression.Scientists have known that your microbiome is partially shaped by your environment, and the people you spend your time with. But they haven't had a lot of clarity on how exactly social networks outside of home and family impact our microbiome makeup.To learn more, a team from Yale University mapped the connections among 2,000 people in isolated villages in Honduras and compared their microbiomes to see how exactly their social closeness impacted their gut bacteria. And it turns out, we're more connected to people in our lives than you may think. Their research was published in the journal Nature.Ira Flatow is joined by sociologist and physician Dr. Nicholas Christakis, who directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University. He studies the biology of human social interactions and was an author on the recent paper. They discuss how the researchers worked with villages in Honduras to gather samples and how they can tell who your friends are, just by looking at your poop.Transcripts for each segment will be available after the show airs on sciencefriday.com.  Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.

Le microbiote intestinal, un ensemble de micro-organismes vivant dans notre système digestif, est unique à chaque individu. Cependant, des études montrent qu'il peut être influencé par nos interactions sociales, révélant un lien étonnant entre les personnes qui se fréquentent régulièrement. Une étude récente menée par Nicholas Christakis et ses collègues, publiée le 20 novembre 2024, explore ce phénomène en examinant le microbiote intestinal de plusieurs habitants de villages isolés au Honduras.Les résultats de l'étudeL'équipe de Christakis a observé que les individus vivant en proximité ou ayant des interactions régulières partageaient des similitudes dans leur microbiote intestinal. Ce constat était valable non seulement pour les membres d'une même famille, mais aussi pour des amis proches. Les chercheurs ont attribué cette convergence à des facteurs tels que les échanges microbiens indirects (par exemple, par le biais d'objets partagés ou d'aliments consommés en commun) et les environnements similaires.Mécanismes de partage du microbioteLe partage de bactéries intestinales peut se produire par des moyens variés :1.Contact physique : Des études antérieures ont montré que le simple fait de se toucher ou d'avoir des interactions proches (comme dans les câlins) peut transférer des micro-organismes.2.Environnement partagé : Les personnes qui vivent ensemble sont exposées aux mêmes sources alimentaires, surfaces et micro-organismes présents dans leur habitat.3.Habitudes alimentaires : Les amis et les membres d'une même famille adoptent souvent des régimes alimentaires similaires, influençant ainsi la composition de leur microbiote.Pourquoi cela est importantLe microbiote joue un rôle clé dans la digestion, le système immunitaire et même la santé mentale. Une convergence du microbiote entre individus proches pourrait donc avoir des implications sur leur santé collective. Par exemple, une étude de Song et al. (2013) a montré que des microbiotes similaires peuvent favoriser une meilleure réponse immunitaire contre certaines infections.Une empreinte sociale biologiqueLe microbiote peut être considéré comme une "signature biologique" reflétant nos interactions sociales. Les travaux de Christakis suggèrent que nos relations influencent directement notre physiologie au niveau microbien, brouillant les frontières entre biologie et sociologie.ConclusionEn observant le microbiote intestinal, il est possible d'identifier les réseaux sociaux d'un individu. Ce domaine émergent de recherche ouvre des perspectives fascinantes sur l'interdépendance biologique et sociale des êtres humains, révélant à quel point nos relations façonnent littéralement qui nous sommes, jusque dans nos entrailles. Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Por que vivemos em uma era dominada pelo surpreendente encanto da ignorância? https://www.estadao.com.br/internacional/por-que-vivemos-em-uma-era-dominada-pelo-surpreendente-encanto-da-ignorancia/ Ideologia, ideologia (Eugenio Bucci) https://www.estadao.com.br/opiniao/eugenio-bucci/ideologia-ideologia/ Nicholas Christakis: From Social Networks to AI, Special Thanksgiving Podcast https://pca.st/1m1g3s0g Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society by Nicholas Christakis https://a.co/d/c1ISVc0 Collapse of Earth's main ocean water circulation system is already happening http://earth.com/news/collapse-of-main-atlantic-ocean-circulaton-current-amoc-is-already-happening Inside the ... Read more The post quando humanos viram deuses, como criar uma sociedade melhor, a Era da Ignorância? appeared first on radinho de pilha.

Nicholas Christakis is a Renaissance Man, with whom I have wanted to have a conversation for some time. There was so much to talk about with him, and each item was so fascinating, that we barely scratched the surface, even in the lengthy discussion we had. This is a great Thanksgiving Day listen.. instead of football games! One can get a sense of the breadth of his activities by considering his positions at Yale University. He is Sterling Professor (the highest endowed chair at Yale) of Social and Natural History, as well as Director of the Yale Institute for Network Science, and Professor in the Departments of Statistics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, and in the School of Management! Nicholas' personal history is almost as fascinating as his academic accomplishments. Born in New Haven to parents who were graduate students at Yale (his father was a student of the notorious Gregory Breit, about whom I heard many stories when years later I became a Professor in that same department, and his mother was a graduate student of Nobel Laureate Lars Onsager), he moved back to Greece when his father had to return for military service, so Nicholas's first language was Greek. His parents moved back to the US several years later, and Nicholas grew up in the US, returning to Yale University to study biology. All throughout his childhood he grew up under the shadow of his mother's fatal illness, and he and his brothers all became doctor's in response. But while in medical school, the bug for scientific research caused him to pursue both a Masters degree in Public Health and eventually a PhD in Sociology. Moving to the University of Chicago, Nicholas focused on caring for dying patients, and exploring how their partnerships affected their health as well as that of their partners. This began an eventual transition to studying not pairs of individuals, but networks of human beings. His laboratory has done groundbreaking experimental work studying how networks of humans operate and how one might improve their functioning. To understand human networks he has also studied networks of animals including our nearest cousins, Primates. The results of his investigations informed his most recent remarkable book, Blueprint, focused on the notion that evolution has endowed us to create and function in ‘good' societies. We spent time discussing all aspects of this work, from the impacts of evolutionary biology on both human and primate societies, artificial communities, and the strange mating rituals of both other animals, and humans, all of which are more diverse than one might otherwise imagine. The exceptions however, prove the rule that a ‘social suite' of characteristics, including cooperation, love and partnership, leadership and other factors, can produce a successful society. Along the way we discussed topics that appear intuitively surprising, such as culture within animal groups, and how behavior can ultimate affect genetics, something that sounds Lamarckian , but is instead a wonderful example of natural selection. We discussed the philosophical question of the nature of ‘good', and whether one can indeed get ‘ought' from ‘is', as David Hume famously questioned, and ended with a discussion of how AI will affect human societies. It was truly a fascinating privilege to have this discussion, and whetted my appetite for further conversations with this lovely and remarkable man. As always, an ad-free video version of this podcast is also available to paid Critical Mass subscribers. Your subscriptions support the non-profit Origins Project Foundation, which produces the podcast. The audio version is available free on the Critical Mass site and on all podcast sites, and the video version will also be available on the Origins Project YouTube. Get full access to Critical Mass at lawrencekrauss.substack.com/subscribe

One of the most fascinating concepts in human health is the idea of social contagion, meaning that emotions, behaviors, and health outcomes can spread through social networks, much like infectious diseases. Examples in the medical literature abound: if a person becomes obese, their friends have a significantly higher chance of becoming obese — even their friends of friends have increased odds of becoming obese. Similarly, someone who quit smoking is likely to create a ripple effect through their social networks, influencing many more people to quit smoking. Social contagion affects life and death itself — after the death of a spouse, the surviving partner's mortality risk increases, and conversely, strong social networks are protective against early death. Much of the groundwork of our understanding of the powerful health effects of social networks laid by Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, a physician-turned-social scientist who is the author of multiple best selling books, including Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus On the Way We Live (2020) in Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society (2019).In this episode, Dr. Christakis shares his remarkable path to medicine and sociology, beginning from witnessing his mother's struggle through serious illness, to his foray into palliative medicine, and finally to his life's work on the social, economic and evolutionary determinants of human welfare. We discuss the mechanisms by which social contagion functions, why modern medicine does a disservice to patients by atomizing their medical problems, how the COVID-19 pandemic illustrates the effects of social networks on public health, the philosophical implications of living an interconnected life, and why human beings are wired to build good societies through our capacity for love, friendship and cooperation.In this episode, you'll hear about 3:17 - Dr. Christakis's path to medicine through witnessing his mother's serious illness 15:05 - How Dr. Christakis became passionate about studying the effects of social networks 24:43 - How social networks affect an individual's health 31:28 - The negative effects that COVID-19 restrictions had on patients and their loved ones38:58 - The central thesis of Dr. Christakis's 2019 book Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society 50:38 - Dr. Christakis's thoughts on how to live a meaningful life  Dr. Nicholas Christakis can be found on Twitter/X at @NAChristakis.Visit our website www.TheDoctorsArt.com where you can find transcripts of all episodes.If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, rate, and review our show, available for free on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. If you know of a doctor, patient, or anyone working in health care who would love to explore meaning in medicine with us on the show, feel free to leave a suggestion in the comments or send an email to info@thedoctorsart.com.Copyright The Doctor's Art Podcast 2024

In this conversation with host Tom Bilyeu, the best-selling author of “Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society” discusses everything from grieving elephants to colonies on Mars and future sex robots. He explains why good human impulses are eventually more powerful than antagonism and division, describes experiments where interaction with artificial intelligence improves peoples' behavior towards each other, and expresses hopeful optimism about our ability to constantly expand the moral sphere and upgrade the social contract. [Original air date: 7-9-20]. SHOW NOTES: Why are we cultural animals in the first place? What is the capacity for culture? [1:00] Nicholas advocates that there is more that unites humanity than there is that divides us [4:43] People don't really think that their life experience is dictated by their group membership [7:12] When travelling, at first people seem so different, but soon it's clear how similar we are [9:38] Nicholas discusses the ability of elephants to feel grief, and why faces are different [13:35] Elephants will teach each other how to raid human crops [18:11] Nicholas explains the power of grief, and the way it is so different from other emotions [20:26] Nicholas talks about the rituals surrounding grief, and how they reconnect people [24:20] Nicholas uses whaling to describe how the human moral sphere has expanded [28:28] Nicholas shares stories of being a hospice doctor [30:33] Nicholas talks about how important active listening is, especially as a hospice doctor [37:49] Nicholas explains how to talk to someone who is dying [41:55] Nicholas then explains the basic principles on how to break bad news [46:21] Nicholas discusses colonizing Mars and why he thinks it is inevitable [49:43] Nicholas and Tom discuss Shackleton and shipwrecks [53:11] How does artificial intelligence change the way humans interact with each other? [56:43] Nicholas talks about sex robots, and how we may need a new social contract [1:01:15] How will we program AI, and how will it affect human society? [1:04:27] Nicholas describes an experiment where robots encouraged human sociality [1:13:47] FOLLOW NICHOLAS: WEBSITE: https://bit.ly/3eepkx7 FACEBOOK: https://bit.ly/2Nber36 TWITTER: https://bit.ly/3d9eWFt CHECK OUT OUR SPONSORS: Tonal: Go to https://impacttheory.co/tonalITpodSept and get $200 off your Tonal purchase with promo code IMPACT. Netsuite: Download the CFO's Guide to AI and Machine Learning for free at https://impacttheory.co/netsuiteITpodSept  Factor Meals: Go to https://impacttheory.co/factorITpodsept24 and use code impacttheory50 to get 50% off your first box plus 20% off your next month.   Huel: Try Huel with 15% OFF today using code IMPACT at https://impacttheory.co/huelITseptpod.  Range Rover: Explore the Range Rover Sport at https://impacttheory.co/rangeroverITpodsept  Shopify: Sign up for a $1/month trial period at https://impacttheory.co/shopifyITpodsept  Navage: Get a cleaning kit as a FREE gift with your order, but only by going to https://impacttheory.co/navageITpodsept24  Betterhelp: This episode is sponsored by BetterHelp. Give online therapy a try at https://betterhelp.com/impacttheory and get 10% off your first month. FOLLOW TOM: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tombilyeu/ Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@tombilyeu?lang=en Twitter: https://twitter.com/tombilyeu YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TomBilyeu What's up, everybody? It's Tom Bilyeu here. If you're serious about leveling up your life, I urge you to check out my new podcast, Tom Bilyeu's Mindset Playbook —a goldmine of my most impactful episodes on mindset, business, and health. Trust me, your future self will thank you. LISTEN AD FREE + BONUS EPISODES on APPLE PODCASTS: apple.co/impacttheory Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Nicholas Christakis, Sterling Professor of Social & Natural Science Departments of Sociolgy statistics and Data Science, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Biomedical Engineering and Medicine at Yale University, USA, and Nikos Kyprides, Head, Microbial Genomics & Metagenomics Super Program, Joint Genome Institute, Lawrence Berkeley National Labolatory, Department of Energy at Berkeley, USA, discuss about "Understanding human social networks by deciphering microbial interactions with AI tools".

Do our genes have an impact on how many friends we'll have in life and the kinds of people we gravitate towards whether our friends are connected to each other? How can the study of social networks help us better prepare for the next pandemic? Nicholas Christakis is a professor of natural and social sciences and directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University. His research focuses on social networks and biosocial science, all of which are central points in his books like, Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live and Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society. He and Greg discuss how genes can influence our social networks, the dynamics of social contagion, and why the arc of human evolution bends towards goodness. *unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:Why even minds as brilliant as Isaac Newton's succumb to financial manias01:01:41 Our ability to function in groups depends, in part, on our ability to copy the mood of others around us. And all of us have had this experience. (01:02:20) It's to build group solidarity. And the other is it's efficient in terms of learning. In other words, rather than having to learn something yourself, you just copy what others are doing. And that's extremely efficient. So rather than having to do your own research and figure out what stock really has good fundamentals, you're like, well, I'll just buy what everyone else is buying that sometimes leads to really over-the-top, frothy bubbles that are quite dangerous for all involved.The spread of germs is the price we pay for the spread of ideas23:07 One of the reasons we affiliate with each other and live in groups is to avail ourselves of this process of social learning, but in so doing, we expose ourselves to other risks—for example, the risks of infection, the risks of violence, and so on. So natural selection over time has balanced these costs and benefits and yielded, I argue, a structure of networks that obeys the principle that the benefits of a connected life outweigh the costs. Otherwise, we would live separate from each other. We wouldn't form networks.Network science in a 21st-century approach06:45 Network science offers a 21st-century approach because it connects the collective and individual layers. It explains how individuals become members of collectivities, become members of groups by identifying the pattern of connections between people. It's kind of a structural approach.Do modern technologies influence human social interactions?17:17 There's no question that new technologies are affecting our social interactions in a number of ways. But the fundamental reality of our desire for social connection and our susceptibility to technology's social influence is not changing over a hundred-year time span. This has been shaped by ancient and powerful evolutionary forces.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Lumpers and splitters Adam Smith Émile Durkheim Karl MarxFrancis GaltonDiffusion of Innovations Thomas Valente Richard DawkinsSteven Pinker Gemeinschaft and GesellschaftGuns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies by Jared DiamondStumbling on Happiness by Daniel Gilbert Guest Profile:Faculty Profile at Yale UniversityHis Work:Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We LiveBlueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good SocietyConnected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives -- How Your Friends' Friends' Friends Affect Everything You Feel, Think, and Do

In this episode of the 21 Day Weight Loss Challenge, I discuss the importance of your social network and how it can influence your health behaviors. Drawing from insights in "The Power of Habit" by Charles Duhigg and "Social Contagion" by Dr. Nicholas Christakis, I explain how our social connections can impact our weight and overall health. The episode explores concepts such as behavioral contagion, emotional contagion, and the influence of modeling and norms within communities. I emphasize the need to invest in our social networks and highlight the role of community interventions and public health campaigns in promoting healthier behaviors. The episode concludes with a challenge to connect with like-minded individuals in your community and reflect on the impact of community interaction on your own well-being. To work with me: https://www.drmarbas.com/ To join the weight loss challenge, join here: https://www.drmarbas.com/21dayweightlosschallenge

Welcome back to Day 5 of our 21 Day Weight Loss Challenge. In today's episode, we delved into the profound influence that relationships have on our weight and overall health. We discussed how healthy relationships can be a source of emotional support, reduce stress, and encourage healthier behaviors, while strained relationships can lead to stress and unhealthy habits. I shared insights from research on social contagion in health, highlighting a study by Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler which suggests that obesity can spread through social networks. This phenomenon also extends to behaviors like smoking, alcohol consumption, exercise, and even mental health states such as depression and happiness. We also talked about how eating habits are significantly shaped by the company we keep, and how we inherit more than just genetics from our family—we inherit lifestyles. This is crucial to remember when considering our risk for conditions like diabetes; it's not just about genetics but also about our lifestyle choices. Furthermore, we touched on the spread of health information and misinformation through social networks, and how stress and coping mechanisms can be socially contagious. It's important to balance being supportive with taking care of our own health needs. For today's challenge, I encouraged you to have a health-focused conversation with someone supportive in your life. I offered tips on how to approach this conversation, such as choosing the right person, setting a comfortable environment, being open and honest, exchanging ideas, and offering and seeking support. I also reminded you of the importance of journaling for self-reflection, providing prompts to help you think about the impact of your relationships on your health, supportive behaviors you've observed, areas for improvement, the value of your health-focused conversation, and plans for nurturing relationships. Remember, this challenge is about embracing a holistic approach to weight loss, focusing on healthy behaviors that can lead to a multitude of benefits beyond just shedding pounds. Thank you for joining me today, and don't forget to download the free PDF guide from drmarbas.com for the full 21-day program. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out via email. I'm looking forward to continuing this journey with you tomorrow on Day 6. Have a beautiful day! Visit: https://www.drmarbas.com/

This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/nicholas_christakis_the_hidden_influence_of_social_networks ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/201-academic-words-reference-from-nicholas-christakis-the-hidden-influence-of-social-networks-ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/BX8LdUclkpo (All Words) https://youtu.be/8vWvkLDGzMU (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/vHlvg5Lt_1M (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)

This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/nicholas_christakis_how_social_networks_predict_epidemics ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/209-academic-words-reference-from-nicholas-christakis-how-social-networks-predict-epidemics-ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/SoDmrzdUvdA (All Words) https://youtu.be/D__8HEn2FPg (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/hLKqrEvcjhk (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)

Nicholas Christakis is the Sterling Professor of Social and Natural Science at Yale University, where he is also Director of the Human Nature Lab and Co-Director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Nicholas is both a sociologist and a physician; after completing his undergraduate at Yale in biology, he received an M.D. and M.P.H. from Harvard and then a Ph.D. in sociology from the University of Pennsylvania. Nicholas has written numerous books, including Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live (Little, Brown Spark, 2020) and Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society (Little, Brown Spark, 2019), and this latter book is the subject of this episode. Robinson and Nicholas first discuss the way that genetics manifest themselves in behavior before turning to the way that specific behaviors and tendencies have evolved in humans to promote the flourishing of societies. They then talk about some particular such behaviors and tendencies, like in-group bias and hierarchy, before turning to some implications of the view for how societies ought or ought not to be structured. Nicholas's Website: https://www.humannaturelab.net Nicholas's Twitter: https://twitter.com/NAChristakis Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society: https://a.co/d/4BeJyS0 OUTLINE 00:00 In This Episode… 01:16 Introduction 04:28 The Motivation Behind Blueprint 23:02 The Genetic Basis of Human Societies 28:27 What Is Network Topology? 38:28 Trade-Complementarity 42:07 The Cultural Universality of Love 48:12 The Eight Cultural Universals 01:02:06 Is Hierarchy Natural? 01:07:13 Human In-Group Bias 01:12:23 Is There a Relationship Between Genes and Social Status? Robinson's Website: http://robinsonerhardt.com Robinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University. Join him in conversations with philosophers, scientists, weightlifters, artists, and everyone in-between.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/robinson-erhardt/support

Today, Debbie re-runs the single most popular of 100+ episodes of [B]OLDER. Exactly two years ago, in the spring of 2021, she asked plague expert Nicholas Christakis, a distinguished Yale professor and author,  the burning question: when will the COVID-19 pandemic end? His answer: 2024. It startled her and burst her bubble of optimism. Vaccines were widely available by then and it seemed like the beginning of the end. Surely he was exaggerating how long it would take for the COVID pandemic to wind down? No, it was only the end of the beginning, he told her.Today that makes sense. And of course, it was prescient.Tune into a re-run of one of the most fascinating episodes of [B]OLDER. (Note that Debbie refers to it as The Gap Year Podcast, the name she gave the podcast during the height of the pandemic. It's now the [B]OLDER podcast. Same podcast; different name.) SHOW NOTES from the original interview with Nicholas Christakis (May 7, 2021)Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, and a Sterling Professor at Yale, has been named to TIME magazine's list of the 100 Most Influential People in the World. His fluency in explaining the intertwined science, epidemiology, psychology, sociology and history of pandemics - and his sense of humor - make this a compelling episode. You'll hear why he chose to publish his latest book, Apollo's Arrow, in the fall of 2020, before we knew the end of the story of COVID-19How his childhood experiences with illness and death affected his career choicesWhat the predictable three phases of a pandemic are (in 2021 we were still in the immediate phase)Why he thinks this pandemic won't be over until 2024They also talked about separating the biological vs. the psychological impacts of the pandemicWhat herd immunity actually means and whether we'll get thereAnd what the public health messaging around the pandemic should beDebbie asks him point blank: when is the next pandemic? The answer is unnerving – sooner than you might think. About Nicholas ChristakisWikipediaTwitterYale UniversityTed TalksHuman Nature Lab at Yale Books by Nicholas ChristakisApollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live by Nicholas Christakis (Little, Brown Spark 2020)Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society by Nicholas Christakis (Little, Brown Spark 2019)Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives by Nicholas Christakis (Little, Brown Spark 2009)Death Foretold: Prophecy and Prognosis in Medical Care by Nicholas Christakis (University of Chicago Press, 2001) Articles and interviewsThe New York Times Book Review: The Pandemic's Future — and Ours (NYT Book Review of Apollo's Arrow, November 3, 2020)A year of COVID: Making sense of an ‘alien and unnatural' time (Yale News, March 4, 2021)Epidemiologist looks to the past to predict second post-pandemic ‘roaring 20s' (The Guardian, December 21, 2020)Denial And Lies Are ‘Almost An Intrinsic Part Of An Epidemic,' Doctor Says (NPR, October 29, 2020)The pandemic is as much about society, leaders, and values as it is about a pathogen (Science Mag, November 17, 2020)The Importance of Being Little: What Young Children Really Need from Grownups by Erika Christakis (Penguin Books 2016)Remote Learning Isn't the Only Problem With School (The Atlantic, December 2020)The COVID-19 Pandemic and the $16 Trillion Virus by Larry H. Summers, PhD and David M. Cutler, PhD (October 12, 2020) Mentioned or usefulThe Plague by Albert Camus (1947)What Is R-naught? Gauging Contagious Infections (Healthline, April 20, 2020)What is Epidemiology?What is Sociology? PHOTO CREDIT: Evan Mann Get the inside skinny on every episode of [B]OLDER:Subscribe to Debbie's newsletter for the inside story about every episode. You will also get her 34-page writing guide: https://bitly.com/debbie-free-guide.   Request from Debbie:If you've been enjoying the podcast, please take a moment to leave a short review on Apple Podcasts. It really makes a difference in attracting new listeners. Connect with Debbie:debbieweil.com[B]OLDER podcastEmail: thebolderpodcast@gmail.comBlog: Gap Year After SixtyFacebook: @debbieweilInstagram: @debbieweilLinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/debbieweilTwitter: @debbieweil Our Media Partners:CoGenerate (formerly Encore.org)MEA and with thanks to Chip ConleyNext For Me (former media partner and in memory of Jeff Tidwell) How to Support this podcast:Leave a review on Apple PodcastsSubscribe via Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Stitcher or Spotify Credits:Host: Debbie WeilProducer: Far Out MediaMusic: Lakeside Path by Duck Lake   

Neo4j in 100 seconds by Fireship:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6L9EoBy8ZkUnder the Hood Series w/ Chris Gioran: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9Hl4pk2FsvWn1M0HMOta_9YpN930Ai8RNodes 2022 Keynote w/ Nicholas Christakis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCMv4UJo--4How to get all connected nodes and relationships of a particular node: https://community.neo4j.com/t5/neo4j-graph-platform/how-to-get-all-the-connected-nodes-and-relationship-of-a/td-p/28464Gartner Magic Quadrant Cloud DBMS 2022: https://neo4j.com/blog/neo4j-recognized-for-the-first-time-in-the-2022-gartner-magic-quadrant-for-cloud-database-management-systems/Workspace in AuraDB from Nodes 2022 w/ John Stegeman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPnOuZ_YZj8&list=PL9Hl4pk2FsvWPcphew_GbLjCWvMpmh4mV&index=43GraphQL Quickstart from GraphConnect 2022 w/ Max Andersson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saerwmnZolQTop 10 Cypher Tuning Tips & Tricks from GraphConnect 2022 w/ Michael Hunger: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAlWoamQ41QNeo4j Driver Best Practices from GraphConnect 2022 w/ David Allen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV_xe2OF7bkHow to import JSON using Cypher and APOC from GraphConnect 2022 w/ Eric Monk: https://youtu.be/PshmP_fXBRsDiscovering Aura Free with Fun Datasets w/ Michael Hunger & Alex Erdl: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9Hl4pk2FsvVZaoIpfsfpdzEXxyUJlAYwExplore Graphs Visually with Jupyter Notebooks from Nodes 2022 w/ Sebastian Muller: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_PbbMVg4ME&list=PL9Hl4pk2FsvWPcphew_GbLjCWvMpmh4mV&index=64Maintain Companion Plant Knowledge Graph in Google Sheets + Neo4j by Sixing Huang: https://towardsdatascience.com/maintain-a-companion-plant-knowledge-graph-in-google-sheets-and-neo4j-4142c0a5065bError when trying to invoke Cypher procedure apoc.spatial.geocodeOnce: https://community.neo4j.com/t5/neo4j-graph-platform/error-when-trying-to-invoke-cypher-procedure-apoc-spatial/td-p/36158GDS in Python to Improve ML Models by Tomaz Bratanic: https://neo4j.com/developer-blog/using-neo4j-graph-data-science-in-python-to-improve-machine-learning-models/A Universe of Knowledge Graphs w/ Dr. Maya Natarajan & Dr. Jesus Barrasa: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ei-pYtYS6UYNeo4j VS Code Extension by Adam Cowley: https://neo4j.com/developer-blog/run-cypher-without-leaving-your-ide-with-neo4j-vscode-extension/Cymple Library: https://github.com/Accenture/CymplePypher Library: https://github.com/emehrkay/PypherFlat Graph GitHub action: https://github.com/marketplace/actions/flat-graph

Guy Spier | The Education of a Value Investor & More  My guest today is Guy Spier. Guy Spier is a Zurich-based author and investor.  He completed his MBA at the Harvard Business School, and holds a First Class degree in PPE (Politics, Philosophy and Economics) from Oxford University where he studied at Brasenose College with the British Prime minister David Cameron.  After completing his MBA, Spier started the Aquamarine Fund which is an investment vehicle inspired by the original 1950's Buffett partnerships. In 2008 Spier made news by bidding $650,000 with his friend, Mohnish Pabrai, to have a charity lunch with Warren Buffett.  His book, “The Education of a Value Investor” has sold more than 50,000 copies. Mr. Spier served as the chair and founder of the Weizmann Science and Business Club, and as a member of the Harvard Business School Alumni Board. He currently serves on the advisory boards of Value Conferences, and of Zurich Minds. He is the founder of VALUEx Zurich, and has co-founded TEDxZürich and TEDxZüriberg. From 2007 to 2009, Mr. Spier served on the Advisory Board of the Dakshana Foundation.  In 2017 Spier joined the newly formed board of the Swiss Friends of Oxford University and is on the board of the UN Watch. He is a member of Entrepreneurs' Organization and of the Young Presidents Organization. Guy lives in Zurich with his wife, and their three children.   Today, you'll hear about:  1) Guy's family history, and how it shaped him, and his investment philosophy.  2) The risk of losing it all.  3) Skiing and investing, it's not the fastest skier that wins, and the one who doesn't get injured.  4) The challenges & opportunities of managing your own family money, and other people's money.  5) Investing is like planting vineyards: “not all vintages will be fantastic, but we will have wine to drink”  6) Creating the right physical, geographic and social environment to flourish as an investor.  7) The right and the wrong, and ethics in the investment business.  8) Success is not a number.  9) As a bonus, we talk about flying small planes, and what it taught both of us about investing.   My favorite quote shared by Guy -- “It doesn't matter how slowly you go, as long you do not stop” – Confucius.   Other notes: Yale Professor mentioned in the episode: Nicholas Christakis, The book is called Connected, TED Talk  Learn more about Talking Billions Learn more about Bogumil Baranowski  Learn more about Sicart Associates, LLC.  Read Money, Life, Family: My Handbook: My complete collection of principles on investing, finding work & life balance, and preserving family wealth.   To get regular updates and bonus content, please sign-up for my substack: ⁠https://bogumilbaranowski.substack.com/⁠ NEVER INVESTMENT ADVICE.  IMPORTANT:  As a reminder, the remarks in this interview represent the views, opinions, and experiences of the participants and are based upon information they believe to be reliable; however, Sicart Associates nor I have independently verified all such remarks.   The content of this podcast is for general, informational purposes, and so are the opinions of members of Sicart Associates, a registered investment adviser, and guests of the show. This podcast does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any specific security or financial instruments or provide investment advice or service. Past performance is not indicative of future results. More information on Sicart Associates is available via its Form ADV disclosure documents available adviserinfo.sec.gov. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/talking-billions/message

As you might have heard, Sidewalk Labs became a part of Google at the beginning of 2022. So City of the Future has been on hiatus...BUT I'm still creating podcasts that I think CotF listeners would like. And I'd like to share them with you all! Urban Roots. If you enjoyed City of the Future season 4, which was all about equitable development, then you should definitely check out Urban Roots. We not only tell the histories of women and people of color that you probably don't know, we also draw the throughline from the past to the present, and talk to folks who are doing equitable, preservation-based development that takes those histories into account. Our two-part series on Indianapolis is a great place to start, but we have episodes on Brooklyn, Cincinnati, and Los Angeles, too. Learn more about it by visiting urbanistmedia.org or emailing urbanrootspodcast@gmail.com. Uncertain things. Less for the urbanist than for the person who is seeking to pop their media bubble, my journalist roommate and I created this interview show back in 2020. We purposely seek out academics, writers, journalists, thinkers across the political spectrum — people who actually want to enter into conversation and debate and leave their silos behind. The nice thing about Uncertain things is that I get to talk with whomever I find interesting and insightful, like evolutionary biologist Nicholas Christakis, historian Niall Ferguson, and journalist Caitlin Flanagan. We do sometimes talk to urbanists, too — like Vishaan Chakrabarti, Justin Davidson, and Michael Kimmelman (coming soon). You can subscribe to it at uncertain.substack.com and email us theuncertaintimes@gmail.com. Last two things — I'd love to hear from City of the Future fans! Reach me via vanessaquirk.com. And if you're an urbanism company who would like to hire me for my podcasting/comms expertise, reach out! Again, at vanessaquirk.com I hope you all have a very happy, safe holiday season. Hopefully I'll be seeing you — in the future!

Nicholas Christakis is a sociologist, a physician, and is the Sterling Professor of Social and Natural Science at Yale University. He is also the author of a variety of books including "Apollo's Arrow" and "Blueprint."During our conversation, Nicholas talks about his experiences as a hospice doctor and what he has learned from working with the dying, his book "Blueprint" and our current evolutionary understanding of human nature, and the scientific roots of love and friendship. He also discusses another topic about which he has written and which he has experienced: the madness of crowds, and the danger of mobs.Nicholas is a polymath, a public intellectual, and an amazingly curious mind. His professional life has spanned many fascinating and important fields, and his life and his knowledge can help all of us to be more self-aware, more conscious of our natures, and more rooted in reality.------------Support via VenmoSupport on SubstackSupport on Patreon------------Show notesRate on SpotifyRate on Apple PodcastsSocial media and all episodes

Howie and Harlan are joined by physician, sociologist, and thinker Nicholas Christakis to talk about how humans have evolved to form powerful connections. Howie provides updates on concussions among high school athletes and the use of Ivermectin for COVID, and Harlan remembers Dr. Barry Zaret, an important figure in cardiology at Yale and beyond. Links:  In Memoriam: Barry L. Zaret, MD Yale News: “Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society” Steven Pinker: “The Better Angels of our Nature” “The Moral Life of Babies” Nicholas Christakis: “The Spread of Obesity in a Large Social Network over 32 Years” Nicholas Christakis: “Algorithms for seeding social networks can enhance the adoption of a public health intervention in urban India”  “Concussions are a bigger problem for kids' football than the NFL”  “Effect of Ivermectin vs Placebo on Time to Sustained Recovery in Outpatients With Mild to Moderate COVID-19”  ”These Doctors Admit They Don't Want Patients With Disabilities” Learn more about the MBA for Executives program at Yale SOM Email Howie and Harlan comments or questions.

Continuing our conversation about behavioral contagions, this episode of Everyday Happiness discusses how we can use them to increase our happiness and the happiness of those around us.     Transcript:   Welcome to Everyday Happiness where we create lasting happiness, in about 2 minutes a day,  through my signature method of Intentional Margins® (creating harmony between your to-dos and your priorities), happiness science, and musings about life.    I'm your host Katie Jefcoat, and in our episode yesterday, we discussed what behavioral contagions are and how they spread. Of course, I had to leave a bit of a cliffhanger to kick off today's conversation about utilizing those behavioral contagions for our benefit. What benefit, you ask? Happiness, of course!   According to a study performed by Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler, they “found that social networks have clusters of happy and unhappy people within them that reach out to three degrees of separation." The happiest people tend to be at the center of their social networks, with each happy person bringing greater happiness to the group.   So, how can you use this to improve your social circle's happiness?   First, I encourage you to look inward, and consider how your emotions are affecting others. By being aware of your emotional processing, you can recognize when a bad mood negatively impacts your group. With this recognition, you can take steps to remove the lousy mood by thinking of something else, sharing your feelings in a positive manner to come to a solution, or, in worst case, removing yourself from the situation.   Second, recognize how other people's emotions are affecting your own. Is your friend's bad attitude dragging you down? Are you growing feelings of resentment, anger, or annoyance at something that wouldn't otherwise bother you because they are feeling that? When you recognize how someone else's feelings are affecting your own, you can take an internal step back and separate yourself from those emotions to keep an unbiased, calm attitude. However, if you are happy and bubbly, go ahead and bask in it!   Third, consider what actions you can take to spread positive or happy emotions. Something as simple as smiling at a stranger, sending a kindness card, or cheering for someone can instantly change the atmosphere in the room. When you send out happy, kind signals, other people will reflect them back to you and others. Remember, a simple act of kindness sends a ripple effect out into the world. Why? As I always say, kindness is contagious. Do your part today by spreading a little more happy contagions today with some simple act of kindness!    Get Everyday Happiness delivered to your inbox by subscribing at: https://www.katiejefcoat.com/happiness   And, let's connect on social at @everydayhappinesswithkatie  and join the community on the hashtags #IntentionalMargins and #everydayhappinesswithkatie on Instagram   Links:  https://onamission.bio/everydayhappiness/   Inspired by this article in https://www.edge.org/conversation/social-networks-and-happiness

Does giving to charity make you feel happier than buying something for yourself? Answer: YES! Tune in today to learn more about how charitable acts benefit happiness.    Transcript:   Welcome to Everyday Happiness where we create lasting happiness, in about 2 minutes a day,  through my signature method of Intentional Margins® (creating harmony between your to-dos and your priorities), happiness science, and musings about life.    I'm your host Katie Jefcoat, and today, I want to talk to you about charity. While I have mentioned charitable giving in passing, I want to dive deeper today. You know that phrase “money can't buy happiness.” Well, it can…as long as you are buying something for someone else. A 2008 study by Harvard Business School professor Michael Norton found that spending money on someone else provided greater happiness than buying something for ourselves. The pleasure of giving to someone could actually be linked to the release of endorphins, commonly known as a “helper's high.” Along with that happiness rush, charitable giving evokes gratitude. Whether you are the one giving or the one receiving, gratitude promotes happiness for both parties. We have talked a lot about gratitude here on Everyday Happiness, so I won't go further back into that today, but you know the details! In addition to making us happier, charitable acts increase social connection. As I have mentioned in past episodes, social connections are a critical component of our happiness. Studies have shown that when we are charitable, it promotes a sense of trust and cooperation with everyone involved. We feel closer to those we are helping and vice versa. We also feel closer to those who help along with us, whether family, friends, colleagues, or community members. As Sonya Lyubomirsky writes in her book The How of Happiness, “Being kind and generous leads you to perceive others more positively and more charitably… it fosters a heightened sense of interdependence and cooperation in your social community.” Lastly, I want to note that kindness is contagious! When you give, it initiates a ripple effect of generosity. A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, by James Fowler of the University of California, San Diego, and Nicholas Christakis of Harvard, found that when one person acts charitably, it inspires other people also to act altruistically. Not only does it remind people of the benefits of charity, but it encourages them to give and inspire even more people to do the same. So whether you want to volunteer, buy gifts for others, or donate money, I encourage you to consider how to incorporate charitable acts into your Intentional Margins. Get Everyday Happiness delivered to your inbox by subscribing at: https://www.katiejefcoat.com/happiness   And, let's connect on social at @everydayhappinesswithkatie  and join the community on the hashtags #IntentionalMargins and #everydayhappinesswithkatie on Instagram   Links:  https://onamission.bio/everydayhappiness/

Dr. Nicholas Christakis is a Greek-American sociologist and physician known for his research on social networks and on the socioeconomic, biosocial, and evolutionary determinants of behavior, health, and longevity. He is the Sterling Professor of Social and Natural Science at Yale University, where he directs the Human Nature Lab. He is also the Co-Director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. If you enjoy the podcast, would you please consider leaving a short review on Apple Podcasts/iTunes and a rating on our Spotify show? It takes less than 60 seconds, and it really makes a difference in helping to convince hard-to-get guests. I also love reading the reviews! Subscribe on YouTube: http://bit.ly/38bZNAY Listen on Apple Podcast: https://buff.ly/2PycRL1 Listen on Spotify: https://bit.ly/growth-minds Follow me on Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/heyseankim Learn Spanish by speaking it for free: https://www.jumpspeak.com Past guests on Growth Minds include: Robert Kiyosaki, Steve Aoki, Robert Greene, Dr. Jason Fung, Dr. Steven Gundry, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Dennis Rodman, Wim Hof, Robin Sharma, Vanessa Van Edwards, King Bach, and more.

In this episode, Xavier Bonilla has a dialogue with Nicholas Christakis about cooperation, social networks, and tribalism. They discuss how humans are more cooperative and have a propensity for good than many people emphasize. They talk about the social suite and examples of unintentional, intentional, and artificial communities. They discuss positive and negative aspects of cooperation, punishment, and social networks. They discuss friendship, in-group tribalism, social learning, teaching, and culture. They also provide a brief update on where COVID-19 is at the moment and what we can expect in the next few years.  Nicholas Christakis is a physician and sociologist who conducts research at his Human Nature Lab at Yale University on social networks. Currently, he is the Sterling Professor of Social and Natural Science, Internal Medicine, & Biomedical Engineering at Yale University.  He has his MPH and MD from Harvard University along with his PhD in Sociology from the University of Pennsylvania. In 2009, he was named by Time magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world. He is the author of Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives, Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of A Good Society, and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live. You can find his lab here. Twitter: @nachristakis

The war rages on in Ukraine, and exclusive new reporting reveals some of the ways Russia's war is being funded. A new Yale study concludes that Russia's economy has been “catastrophically crippled” by western sanctions – so how is President Putin fueling his war machine? Partly thanks to his meddling in Africa. In an exclusive report, Nima Elbagir reveals how Moscow stopped democratic change over 6,000 miles away in Sudan, just as its people had successfully toppled one of the longest standing African dictators through peaceful street protests. One key reason: Sudan is one of the world's biggest exporters of gold, and Russia has been illegally exploiting and smuggling this resource from Sudan for years. Nima and her team traveled to the north of the country to show how Russia manipulates the Sudanese military government and how it uses front companies to get around U.S. sanctions to hold onto the gold.  Also on today's show: The Kite Runner actors Amir Arison, Azita Ghanizada and Faran Tahir; Yale social and natural science professor Nicholas Christakis.To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

Matthew is a journalist who worked at The Weekly Standard and co-founded The Washington Free Beacon, where he served as editor-in-chief. Currently he’s a contributing editor at National Review, a columnist at Commentary, and a senior fellow and the Patrick and Charlene Neal Chair in American Prosperity at the American Enterprise Institute. We discuss his wonderful book, The Right: The Hundred-Year War for American Conservatism.You can listen to the episode right away in the audio player above (or click the dropdown menu to add the Dishcast to your podcast feed). For two clips of my convo with Matthew — on whether the GOP is destroying the Constitution, and debating how conservative was Obama was — pop over to our YouTube page.A listener looks back to last week’s episode:I enjoyed your discussion of friendship with Jennifer Senior, particularly your observation that a friend is someone we don’t want to change.  It reminded me of one of my favorite quotes by Friedrich Nietzsche: “Love is blind, friendship closes its eyes.”And here’s some insight from Jesus on the subject:Another listener grumbles:Another woman talking about friendship? How novel. How about finding some guys to talk about it? Because it sure is tough for straight men to find new friendships. The old ones fall apart for much the same reason that women's do, but the straight male psyche seems particularly resistant  to making new ones.  The Dishcast, in fact, recently aired an episode with Nicholas Christakis that covered quite a bit about the nature of friendship between straight men. Much of it centers on taking the piss out of each other:Another listener remarks on the part of my convo with Jennifer about the evolving nature of newsrooms — basically that they’re boring now, ensconced in Slack:I agree about the dead quiet in newsrooms these days. I started out in broadcasting in the early ‘80s, with a stint at NPR in the late ‘80s early ‘90s. People would shout and yell and ask questions on spelling, grammar and facts about previous stories, all while rushing to meet the deadlines. Then a few years ago, I worked in a major public radio newsroom and it was dead quiet. The editor sitting behind me would type a question to me via top-line message and I’d just turn around and answer him. It was a major sin! So boring! Thankfully now I work for a small nonprofit newsroom and I’m the head of our tiny audio division. Sadly COVID made our newsroom virtual, but oh how I miss those early, pre-internet newsrooms with people arguing and talking and joking with each other.Here’s what Jennifer and I have to say:After the Continetti convo this week, here are a few requests for more conservative guests:Sometimes I feel like you’re a friend of mine, since I’ve been reading you for so long — God, since the ‘80s. The thing is your intellectual honesty, and changing your mind when facts change. So please, please, get Rod Dreher on to talk with you! We love it when you talk to someone who’s in the same area but looking in another direction. What Dreher is going through is just beyond the pale — embracing a strongman authoritarian regime and calling it conservatism. It’s the same as the left embracing CRT and calling it liberal. Yep. I just need to summon up the emotional energy for him. Another asks:Have you ever considered getting Ben Shapiro on? I think he might be a more fun guest than Ann Coulter (even though I enjoyed listening to your interaction with her), and he’s honestly more capable of learning (i.e. I’m hoping it’d be a educational interaction for him).Always open to your guest recommendations — and your commentary on the episodes: dish@andrewsullivan.com.More dissents. First up, from one of the readers who most frequently criticizes the Dish’s coverage of crime:Last week you highlighted Scott Alexander’s column on the 2020 murder spike, calling it “devastating.” In fact, it’s wildly off-base. I’m sure Scott is a smart guy, but he’s wading into an incredibly complex subject with very little respect for or understanding of the work of others.His argument rests on timing. Murders began spiking around the launch of Black Lives Matter protests —  the “structural break” mentioned in the Council on Criminal Justice’s report he cites — so, he says, it follows that one caused the other. This is a version of the “Ferguson Effect” theory, and it’s fared very poorly in the academic literature — though you wouldn’t know it from Scott’s selective citations. That doesn’t mean protests are irrelevant to crime, but the best research on the subject points out something that Scott, in his rush to judgment, misses: people don’t protest for no reason. Instead, protests tend to be caused by external factors, like police brutality. That’s why Rick Rosenfeld, who serves on the Council on Criminal Justice and did much of the descriptive work that Scott cites, argues that crises in police legitimacy, not protests, are what drive increases in violent crime and murders.The distinction is subtle but important, for methodological reasons that needn’t detain us and theoretical ones that should. Specifically, blaming protesters for rising violence is essentially an elaborate way of “blaming the victim.” If protests cause murders to rise, what else are people to do when police terrorize or kill their neighbors — as happened to George Floyd and so many others? Looking further upstream places the blame for degraded police legitimacy where it belongs: on the police force itself. What really irks me about Scott’s column, though, is its certainty in the face of an unbelievably complex social crisis. There’s a reason criminologists (not the most liberal bunch, trust me) haven’t settled on protests as the sole reason for a 30% nationwide murder spike, felt in rural communities as well as cities. Sometimes things really are complicated, and that’s ok.Scott followed up his post by replying to the best dissents from his readers, including Matt Yglesias, who began his reply, “I agree with almost everything in this post except for the media criticism parts.” You rarely see this kind of debate in the MSM. Check it out.Next up, abortion. First, a dissent from the right:Your wrong characterization of the rejection of Roe v. Wade is another example of your conversion to the Left. No mention of the 63 million babies who were murdered in the last 49 years, but oh how well you stand up for women and their right to have as many one-night stands as they want without consequences, guilt, or their morality even being questioned. Instead you should be praising the Supreme Court for finally beginning to bring our democracy back to the original standard — that only the legislature makes laws — not the president and not the courts. You should be rejoicing over the fact that abortion rights are forced back into the hands of the state legislatures, and ultimately (to some extent) into the hands of the voters. It should have been this way for the last 50 years, but a radical leftist cabal took over our Supreme Court and made decisions with very little legal support or logic. If it really is a fundamental right of women to control their bodies and ignore the consequences of killing the babies they produce, 50 years of debate and voting would have proved it to be so, and abortion would be largely legal throughout the US today. But instead, the Supreme Court dictated the law from out of nowhere, dictatorially legislated the law of the land, and the cost has been the unjust murder of some portion of 63 million babies. You should be sickened by it.So today I leave your blog. You’ve transformed from my favorite writer, defender of liberty and “explainer” of the evils of CRT and the transgender movement, to just another gay leftist parroting the lies of immoral people who have no concept of what makes our country different from all the rest. Your conversion is sad and twisted because you have the ability to reach out to the citizens who have no idea how important liberty is or what is required to safeguard it.I honestly don’t know what you’re talking about. The entire piece was a defense of abortion as a subject for democratic deliberation and not judicial fiat. That’s been my view for years. In this fraught and complex topic, I think a compromise on the European lines is the least worst option. I also believe — and have said so on multiple times — that I share your view that abortion is a moral evil, and the taking of human life. I could never be a party to one. But many disagree with me and you. And we live in a pluralistic society. And the question of when human life becomes a human person is a highly debatable one. Banning all abortion would be a disaster. Limiting and regulating it is a far better option. As for sexual freedom, you’ve got me there. As long as it’s between adults, and consensual, I have no problem with it, and lots of experience with it. I truly don’t think it is intrinsically wrong. Human beings’ sexuality is far more expansive and diverse than most other species’, and if children and marriage are not involved, I see no reason to curtail it, and many reasons to celebrate it.Next, a dissent from the left:You seem to argue from the perspective that Roe was not a compromise. It was. It was a politically failed attempt to pick a middle ground. Culturally, Roe succeeded. If you check Pew Research Center, the majority of Americans favor unrestricted abortion early in pregnancy, allowing a woman to terminate a pregnancy for any reason. Americans favor restrictions later, allowing for life of the mother and viability of the fetus concerns. This is the compromise between no abortions even for pregnancies of non-consensual sex and abortion on demand for any reason.In vitro fertilization remains a corner case. Generally, fertility clinics have legally binding contracts saying what should be done with unused embryos if a couple separates. However, if state laws regard all embryos as human beings, this raises important questions. Can a couple discard viable embryos when their family has reached the size they desire? If there is a dispute, does the party who wishes to bring an embryo to term have a right to do that over the objection of the party who does not? If a couple is conceiving through IVF to avoid a serious genetic anomaly, will it be legal to discard a viable but non-normal embryo, such as one with trisomy 21?What to do about pregnancies conceived through non-consensual sex continues to be the biggest challenge for the right-to-life movement. If the State can compel a woman to carry a pregnancy to term, even if the sex act was non-consensual, what other things can the State compel regarding our bodies? Surely states could compel mandatory vaccination, which is much less invasive and less likely to result in negative outcomes.Following that, what about states that forbid abortion but do not engage in good-faith efforts to catch and convict rapists? The map at End The Backlog does not correlate well with states based on their abortion laws. The map shows Alabama as “unknown.” A quick Internet search of “rape kit backlog Alabama” pulls up articles about backlogs of over 1,000 kits. One article talks about a community that can’t gather evidence anymore because they don’t have any specially-trained nurses. Texas is listed as having over 6,000 backlogged kits. Oklahoma has 4,600. (To be fair, California’s backlog is almost 14,000 and New York’s is unknown.) Ancestry DNA websites have made even very cold cases possible to solve. Yet, our society continues to let rapists repeat.You wrote: “I also believe that the Court could approximate your vision, in defending minority rights. But women are hardly a minority, and many women — at about the same rate as men — want abortion to be illegal.” You also wrote: “Those rights are related to minorities who cannot prevail democratically — not half the human population.”Rights are defensible when they belong to the minority — but if the right belongs to the majority, it doesn’t need to be defended? I know you are a fan of George Orwell, but this is sounding a lot like, “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” I thought rights were rights regardless of how many or which people have them. Isn’t that the point?I'd love to see you engage with what should be the conservative argument for widespread access to contraception and abortion in the first trimester. If the conservative goal is a society where everyone contributes and rises or falls on merit, then access to reproductive health care should be a conservative priority. We know from developing nations one of the best ways to improve standards of living is to improve family planning. Most women will size their families to match the resources at hand. If conservatives want to reduce the welfare state, affordable and accessible family planning would go a long way toward doing that. Instead, the poorest states and most conservative states in our country are the ones who make it difficult.Conservatives are the ones arguing for limited government. Getting in the middle of one of the most difficult decisions anyone will ever make does not look like limited government.As always, thank you for an engaging read, even when I disagree.I truly don’t think Roe is in line with public opinion, or a compromise. Here’s where Americans stand on the question from a recent Marist/PBS poll:Nearly seven in ten (68%) support some type of restrictions on abortion. This includes 13% who think abortion should be allowed within the first six months of pregnancy, 22% who believe abortion should be allowed during the first three months of pregnancy, 23% who say abortion should be allowed in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the pregnant person, and 10% who say abortion should be allowed only to save the life of the pregnant person.Even 52% of Democrats think limits should be put on abortion.Roe mandated the most expansive abortion regime in the West. A democratic adjustment to the Western norm does not seem to me to be an outrage — as the polls suggest. Yes, I do think that rapists should be brought to justice; that a complement to abortion restrictions should be much more accessible healthcare for pregnant mothers before and after birth; more distribution of contraception; greater availability of adoption options; and medical exceptions for late-term abortions where the mother desperately wants the child but deformity or genetic disease makes delivery traumatizing, and the child’s life almost certainly short. Which is to say: in that situation, it should be up to mothers and doctors. Get full access to The Weekly Dish at andrewsullivan.substack.com/subscribe

“Are there simple forms of artificial intelligence, simple programming of bots, such that when they are added to groups of humans – because those humans are smart or otherwise positively inclined - that help the humans to help themselves? Can we get groups of people to work better together, for instance, to confront climate change, or to reduce racism online, or to foster innovation within firms?Can we have simple forms of AI that are added into our midst that make us work better together? And the work we're doing in that part of my lab shows that abundantly that's the case. And we published a stream of papers showing that we can do that.” Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world.Nicholas Christakis: humannaturelab.net/people/nicholas-christakisHuman Nature Lab: humannaturelab.netYale Institute for Network Science: yins.yale.edusociology.yale.edu/people/nicholas-christakisTRELLIS - Suite of software tools for developing, administering, and collecting survey and social network data: trellis.yale.edu.The Atlantic: “How AI Will Rewire Us: For better and for worse, robots will alter humans' capacity for altruism, love, and friendship”www.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.org

Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world.“We're not attempting to invent super smart AI to replace human cognition. We are inventing dumb AI to supplement human interaction. Are there simple forms of artificial intelligence, simple programming of bots, such that when they are added to groups of humans – because those humans are smart or otherwise positively inclined - that help the humans to help themselves? Can we get groups of people to work better together, for instance, to confront climate change, or to reduce racism online, or to foster innovation within firms? Can we have simple forms of AI that are added into our midst that make us work better together? And the work we're doing in that part of my lab shows that abundantly that's the case. And we published a stream of papers showing that we can do that.”· Nicholas Christakis: humannaturelab.net/people/nicholas-christakis· Human Nature Lab: humannaturelab.net· Yale Institute for Network Science: yins.yale.edu· sociology.yale.edu/people/nicholas-christakis · Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society · Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live· TRELLIS - Suite of software tools for developing, administering, and collecting survey and social network data: trellis.yale.edu.The Atlantic: “How AI Will Rewire Us: For better and for worse, robots will alter humans' capacity for altruism, love, and friendship”www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/04/robots-human-relationships/583204/· www.creativeprocess.info · www.oneplanetpodcast.org

Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world.“When we look around the world, we see endless and timeless fear, ignorance, hatred, and violence. From our position, we could also boundlessly catalogue the minute details of human groups, highlighting and emphasizing the differences among them. But this pessimistic gaze that separates humans from one another by highlighting evil and by emphasizing difference misses an important underlying unity and overlooks our common humanity. Humans everywhere are also pre-wired to make a particular kind of society — one full of love, friendship, cooperation, and learning.
Humans have always had both competitive and cooperative impulses, both violent and beneficent tendencies. Like the two strands of the double helix of our DNA, these conflicting impulses are intertwined. We are primed for conflict and hatred but also for love, friendship, and cooperation. If anything, modern societies are just a patina of civilization on top of this evolutionary blueprint.
The good things we see around us are part of what makes us human in the first place. We should be humble in the face of temptations to engineer society in opposition to our instincts. Fortunately, we do not need to exercise any such authority in order to have a good life. The arc of our evolutionary history is long. But it bends toward goodness.”Excerpted from BLUEPRINT: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good SocietyCopyright 2020 by Nicholas A. Christakis· www.oneplanetpodcast.org· www.creativeprocess.info

Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world. “When we look around the world, we see endless and timeless fear, ignorance, hatred, and violence. From our position, we could also boundlessly catalogue the minute details of human groups, highlighting and emphasizing the differences among them. But this pessimistic gaze that separates humans from one another by highlighting evil and by emphasizing difference misses an important underlying unity and overlooks our common humanity. Humans everywhere are also pre-wired to make a particular kind of society — one full of love, friendship, cooperation, and learning.Humans have always had both competitive and cooperative impulses, both violent and beneficent tendencies. Like the two strands of the double helix of our DNA, these conflicting impulses are intertwined. We are primed for conflict and hatred but also for love, friendship, and cooperation. If anything, modern societies are just a patina of civilization on top of this evolutionary blueprint. The good things we see around us are part of what makes us human in the first place. We should be humble in the face of temptations to engineer society in opposition to our instincts. Fortunately, we do not need to exercise any such authority in order to have a good life. The arc of our evolutionary history is long. But it bends toward goodness.”Excerpted from BLUEPRINT: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good SocietyCopyright 2020 by Nicholas A. Christakishumannaturelab.net/people/nicholas-christakisHuman Nature Lab humannaturelab.netYale Institute for Network Science yins.yale.eduTRELLIS - Suite of software tools for developing, administering, and collecting survey and social network data trellis.yale.eduThe Atlantic: “How AI Will Rewire Us: For better and for worse, robots will alter humans' capacity for altruism, love, and friendship”www.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.org

“When we look around the world, we see endless and timeless fear, ignorance, hatred, and violence. From our position, we could also boundlessly catalogue the minute details of human groups, highlighting and emphasizing the differences among them. But this pessimistic gaze that separates humans from one another by highlighting evil and by emphasizing difference misses an important underlying unity and overlooks our common humanity. Humans everywhere are also pre-wired to make a particular kind of society — one full of love, friendship, cooperation, and learning.
Humans have always had both competitive and cooperative impulses, both violent and beneficent tendencies. Like the two strands of the double helix of our DNA, these conflicting impulses are intertwined. We are primed for conflict and hatred but also for love, friendship, and cooperation. If anything, modern societies are just a patina of civilization on top of this evolutionary blueprint.
The good things we see around us are part of what makes us human in the first place. We should be humble in the face of temptations to engineer society in opposition to our instincts. Fortunately, we do not need to exercise any such authority in order to have a good life. The arc of our evolutionary history is long. But it bends toward goodness.”Excerpted from BLUEPRINT: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good SocietyCopyright 2020 by Nicholas A. ChristakisNicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world. “When we look around the world, we see endless and timeless fear, ignorance, hatred, and violence. From our position, we could also boundlessly catalogue the minute details of human groups, highlighting and emphasizing the differences among them. But this pessimistic gaze that separates humans from one another by highlighting evil and by emphasizing difference misses an important underlying unity and overlooks our common humanity. Humans everywhere are also pre-wired to make a particular kind of society — one full of love, friendship, cooperation, and learning. Humans have always had both competitive and cooperative impulses, both violent and beneficent tendencies. Like the two strands of the double helix of our DNA, these conflicting impulses are intertwined. We are primed for conflict and hatred but also for love, friendship, and cooperation. If anything, modern societies are just a patina of civilization on top of this evolutionary blueprint. The good things we see around us are part of what makes us human in the first place. We should be humble in the face of temptations to engineer society in opposition to our instincts. Fortunately, we do not need to exercise any such authority in order to have a good life. The arc of our evolutionary history is long. But it bends toward goodness.”humannaturelab.net/people/nicholas-christakisHuman Nature Lab humannaturelab.netYale Institute for Network Science yins.yale.eduTRELLIS - Suite of software tools for developing, administering, and collecting survey and social network data trellis.yale.eduThe Atlantic: “How AI Will Rewire Us: For better and for worse, robots will alter humans' capacity for altruism, love, and friendship”www.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.org

“We're not attempting to invent super smart AI to replace human cognition. We are inventing dumb AI to supplement human interaction. Are there simple forms of artificial intelligence, simple programming of bots, such that when they are added to groups of humans – because those humans are smart or otherwise positively inclined - that help the humans to help themselves? Can we get groups of people to work better together, for instance, to confront climate change, or to reduce racism online, or to foster innovation within firms?Can we have simple forms of AI that are added into our midst that make us work better together? And the work we're doing in that part of my lab shows that abundantly that's the case. And we published a stream of papers showing that we can do that.” Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world.Nicholas Christakis Human Nature Lab humannaturelab.netYale Institute for Network Science yins.yale.eduTRELLIS - Suite of software tools for developing, administering, and collecting survey and social network data trellis.yale.eduThe Atlantic: “How AI Will Rewire Us: For better and for worse, robots will alter humans' capacity for altruism, love, and friendship”www.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.org

Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world. “When we look around the world, we see endless and timeless fear, ignorance, hatred, and violence. From our position, we could also boundlessly catalogue the minute details of human groups, highlighting and emphasizing the differences among them. But this pessimistic gaze that separates humans from one another by highlighting evil and by emphasizing difference misses an important underlying unity and overlooks our common humanity. Humans everywhere are also pre-wired to make a particular kind of society — one full of love, friendship, cooperation, and learning. Humans have always had both competitive and cooperative impulses, both violent and beneficent tendencies. Like the two strands of the double helix of our DNA, these conflicting impulses are intertwined. We are primed for conflict and hatred but also for love, friendship, and cooperation. If anything, modern societies are just a patina of civilization on top of this evolutionary blueprint. The good things we see around us are part of what makes us human in the first place. We should be humble in the face of temptations to engineer society in opposition to our instincts. Fortunately, we do not need to exercise any such authority in order to have a good life. The arc of our evolutionary history is long. But it bends toward goodness.”Excerpted from BLUEPRINT: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society Copyright 2020 by Nicholas A. ChristakisNicholas ChristakisHuman Nature Lab humannaturelab.netYale Institute for Network Science yins.yale.eduTRELLIS - Suite of software tools for developing, administering, and collecting survey and social network data trellis.yale.eduThe Atlantic: “How AI Will Rewire Us: For better and for worse, robots will alter humans' capacity for altruism, love, and friendship”www.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.org

“So cities are amazing. Now, why are they amazing? Well, there's one aspect that relates to some of the work that my lab does on human social interactions, which is the main focus of what my lab does. We look at the mathematical, biological, psychological, and social underpinnings and consequences of human social interactions...As the size of the population grows, the combinatorial complexity, the network complexity rises superlinearly. So a city that's 10 times the size has a hundred times as many social possible social connections. And it's the social connections between people that lead to the creation of new ideas, people mixing and bumping into each other with different occupations and different business ideas, and different ways of life. So one of the ideas about cities is that they are these creative places and, as they get bigger and bigger, they get more and more creative. That's just one thought that connects networks to cities in the 21st century”Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world.Nicholas Christakis humannaturelab.net/people/nicholas-christakisHuman Nature Lab: humannaturelab.netYale Institute for Network Science yins.yale.edusociology.yale.edu/people/nicholas-christakisBlueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We LiveTRELLIS - Suite of software tools for developing, administering, and collecting survey and social network data: trellis.yale.edu.The Atlantic: “How AI Will Rewire Us: For better and for worse, robots will alter humans' capacity for altruism, love, and friendship”www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/04/robots-human-relationships/583204/www.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.org

Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world.“So cities are amazing. Now, why are they amazing? Well, there's one aspect that relates to some of the work that my lab does on human social interactions, which is the main focus of what my lab does. We look at the mathematical, biological, psychological, and social underpinnings and consequences of human social interactions...As the size of the population grows, the combinatorial complexity, the network complexity rises superlinearly. So a city that's 10 times the size has a hundred times as many social possible social connections. And it's the social connections between people that lead to the creation of new ideas, people mixing and bumping into each other with different occupations and different business ideas, and different ways of life. So one of the ideas about cities is that they are these creative places and, as they get bigger and bigger, they get more and more creative. That's just one thought that connects networks to cities in the 21st century”Nicholas Christakis humannaturelab.net/people/nicholas-christakisHuman Nature Lab: humannaturelab.netYale Institute for Network Science yins.yale.edusociology.yale.edu/people/nicholas-christakisBlueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We LiveTRELLIS - Suite of software tools for developing, administering, and collecting survey and social network data: trellis.yale.edu.The Atlantic: “How AI Will Rewire Us: For better and for worse, robots will alter humans' capacity for altruism, love, and friendship”www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/04/robots-human-relationships/583204/www.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.org

“We're not attempting to invent super smart AI to replace human cognition. We are inventing dumb AI to supplement human interaction. Are there simple forms of artificial intelligence, simple programming of bots, such that when they are added to groups of humans – because those humans are smart or otherwise positively inclined - that help the humans to help themselves? Can we get groups of people to work better together, for instance, to confront climate change, or to reduce racism online, or to foster innovation within firms? Can we have simple forms of AI that are added into our midst that make us work better together? And the work we're doing in that part of my lab shows that abundantly that's the case. And we published a stream of papers showing that we can do that.”Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world.
humannaturelab.net/people/nicholas-christakisHuman Nature Lab humannaturelab.netYale Institute for Network Science yins.yale.eduTRELLIS - Suite of software tools for developing, administering, and collecting survey and social network data trellis.yale.eduThe Atlantic: “How AI Will Rewire Us: For better and for worse, robots will alter humans' capacity for altruism, love, and friendship”www.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.org

“We're not attempting to invent super smart AI to replace human cognition. We are inventing dumb AI to supplement human interaction. Are there simple forms of artificial intelligence, simple programming of bots, such that when they are added to groups of humans – because those humans are smart or otherwise positively inclined - that help the humans to help themselves? Can we get groups of people to work better together, for instance, to confront climate change, or to reduce racism online, or to foster innovation within firms?Can we have simple forms of AI that are added into our midst that make us work better together? And the work we're doing in that part of my lab shows that abundantly that's the case. And we published a stream of papers showing that we can do that.” Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world.Nicholas Christakis: humannaturelab.net/people/nicholas-christakisHuman Nature Lab: humannaturelab.net Yale Institute for Network Science: yins.yale.edusociology.yale.edu/people/nicholas-christakisBlueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We LiveTRELLIS - Suite of software tools for developing, administering, and collecting survey and social network data: trellis.yale.edu.The Atlantic: “How AI Will Rewire Us: For better and for worse, robots will alter humans' capacity for altruism, love, and friendship”www.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.org

Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world.“We're not attempting to invent super smart AI to replace human cognition. We are inventing dumb AI to supplement human interaction. Are there simple forms of artificial intelligence, simple programming of bots, such that when they are added to groups of humans – because those humans are smart or otherwise positively inclined - that help the humans to help themselves? Can we get groups of people to work better together, for instance, to confront climate change, or to reduce racism online, or to foster innovation within firms? Can we have simple forms of AI that are added into our midst that make us work better together? And the work we're doing in that part of my lab shows that abundantly that's the case. And we published a stream of papers showing that we can do that.”Nicholas Christakis humannaturelab.net/people/nicholas-christakisHuman Nature Lab: humannaturelab.netYale Institute for Network Science yins.yale.edusociology.yale.edu/people/nicholas-christakisBlueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We LiveTRELLIS - Suite of software tools for developing, administering, and collecting survey and social network data: trellis.yale.edu.The Atlantic: “How AI Will Rewire Us: For better and for worse, robots will alter humans' capacity for altruism, love, and friendship”www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/04/robots-human-relationships/583204/www.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.org

Nicholas Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is a social scientist and physician who conducts research in the areas of biosocial science, network science and behavioral genetics. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University and is the co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Dr. Christakis has authored numerous books, including Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society published in 2019 and Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live published in 2020. In 2009, Christakis was named by TIME magazine to their annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world.
“We're not attempting to invent super smart AI to replace human cognition. We are inventing dumb AI to supplement human interaction. Are there simple forms of artificial intelligence, simple programming of bots, such that when they are added to groups of humans – because those humans are smart or otherwise positively inclined - that help the humans to help themselves? Can we get groups of people to work better together, for instance, to confront climate change, or to reduce racism online, or to foster innovation within firms? Can we have simple forms of AI that are added into our midst that make us work better together? And the work we're doing in that part of my lab shows that abundantly that's the case. And we published a stream of papers showing that we can do that.”Nicholas Christakis Human Nature Lab humannaturelab.netYale Institute for Network Science yins.yale.eduTRELLIS - Suite of software tools for developing, administering, and collecting survey and social network data trellis.yale.eduThe Atlantic: “How AI Will Rewire Us: For better and for worse, robots will alter humans' capacity for altruism, love, and friendship”www.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.org

Are we moving "out of the pandemic phase" of COVID-19? Today we talk with the Director of the Human Nature Lab at Yale University, Nicholas Christakis, and Special Advisor to the Director General of the World Health Organization, Ezekiel Emanuel, about what we've learned over the past two years and where we can go from here. What Could Go Right? is produced by The Progress Network and The Podglomerate.

Bari was an op-ed editor at the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times before leaving to create her own op-ed page on Substack, “Common Sense.” She’s also the author of How to Fight Anti-Semitism, and for some reason one of the most reviled figures on Left Twitter, despite being one of the most gifted editors of her generation. We talk groomers and culture war desperation and the amnesia of recent triumphs.This was a joint podcast, and you’ll be able to hear a somewhat longer version of the discussion next week on Bari’s pod, “Honestly.” You can listen to our version right away in the audio player embedded above, or right below it you can click “Listen in podcast app,” which will connect you to the Dishcast feed. For two clips — on wokeness enabling the far right, and on the agonizing choice when it comes to gender theory in schools — head over to our YouTube page. New transcript just dropped: my conversation with John McWhorter, which is still our most downloaded episode on the Dishcast. We get into his latest book, Woke Racism, and how the successor ideology hurts black kids:First up in Dishcast feedback this week, a “brief note of appreciation from a longtime reader and subscriber”:I’ve been following the Dish since the inception of the blogosphere, and your Substack is a welcome addition to my intellectual life, especially the podcasts, which seem to get better and better. The last two — with Nicholas Christakis and Jonathan Haidt — have been especially wonderful. (I’ve also benefited considerably from Johann Hari’s excellent new book, which has largely taken me off social media). There are episodes that have annoyed me (e.g. the one with Anne Applebaum), but I listen because I don’t want to be part of an echo chamber.Speaking of the Haidt pod, a listener dug up a gem from my favorite philosopher:I appreciated the episode and Haidt’s recent piece in the Atlantic that invokes the Tower of Babel. The essay you mentioned by Oakeshott on Babel was not, as you worried, easily found, but it’s nonetheless attached:The Haidt episode “sparked many new thoughts” from this listener:The word “proportion” was mentioned in passing, but I think that word is crucial to understanding the real dysfunction wrought by social media. We have lost all sense of proportion in this post-Babel world. Whether it’s the trans debate — a conversation that really only affects one percent of the population — or CRT in schools, it’s difficult to talk about these heated culture-war topics while holding them in proportion to the real problems facing our society. The power (or fear) of going viral on Twitter makes proportion impossible, which is one of the reasons why journalism is in such a bad place. Because nuance and context are hard, journalists and media figures — particularly cable news anchors — appear to be simply unequipped to deliver information in a way that holds these things in balance. Consider the Hunter laptop story. Why was this story “buried” by the media? Was it a conspiracy in which corporate elite journalists just didn’t want Hunter Biden to look bad? Or, more likely, do they intuitively understand that in the post-Babel world, they don’t have the skills and tools to talk about this story, which may not have been the biggest of deals but also didn’t look great in the lead up to a pivotal election? They didn’t want “But her emails” 2.0 — another viral story that had no sense of proportion. Most people couldn’t even tell you what, exactly, was corrupt about Clinton’s emails; they just knew they existed because that’s all anyone talked about, and since it was all anyone was talking about, it must be bad, bad, bad! The media simply doesn’t know how to function from a place of nuance; it can’t communicate information in a way that holds that information in proportion to its relevance, context, and importance. Is this the fault of social media and viral dynamics? Is it just really bad journalism? Or do journalists have such a low opinion of the polity that they believe most people won’t be bothered to try to understand complicated stories? Thank god for podcasts!This next listener also tackles Twitter:I think it is worth pointing out, as you have, that Twitter is at best 80 million US users (per Newsweek / Statista in 2021) whereas Twitter reported 38 million monetize-able daily active usage in the US in 2021. This number is probably closer to actual usage to account for dormant / duplicate accounts. Normal Americans, outside of radicals (which aren’t normal), don’t engage in the elite masturbatory thing that is Twitter. I am in a demo that should use it but have never had an account, because I view it as a complete and utter waste of time. The US Census has the 2021 population at 330 million with 22% under 18 (call it 73 million). I assume some portion of those are on Twitter, but they can’t vote. At the low end, that leaves 180 million voting Americans not on Twitter. So I think it’s worth reiterating that Twitter is not real life (or a majority of voters). If you were to break it down by ideological lines, I am sure it is further skewed in one direction, you needn't guess which. Today’s “journalists” investigative efforts often seem to largely rely on copy pasting tweets as the “public reaction” — it is no wonder why they are out of touch. Furthermore, as Jesse reminded us during this week’s freakout over Elon Musk buying Twitter, “Twitter Is Not America”:In the United States, Twitter users are statistically younger, wealthier, and more politically liberal than the general population. They are also substantially better educated, according to Pew: 42 percent of sampled users had a college degree, versus 31 percent for U.S. adults broadly. Forty-one percent reported an income of more than $75,000, too, another large difference from the country as a whole. They were far more likely (60 percent) to be Democrats or lean Democratic than to be Republicans or lean Republican (35 percent).This next listener dissents over the Haidt convo:I try not to be a scold, but sometimes the temptation is too great. Early in your talk you talked about how you didn’t understand young kids these days — why they are killing themselves at a high rate, since everything for them is so much better than it was in the old days. It sounds just like all of us old guys not getting youngsters. Haidt did talk about how he learned to approach unfamiliar cultures like an anthropologist — a good place to start for us old folks. While I agree with you about the proliferation of gender types, it was not so long ago that homosexuality raised the same kinds of questions that you ask, and it was looked at the same way. Some people questioned the reality of such a thing, or saw it as a simple choice that perverse people made, or as a psychiatric illness that required treatment, and of course as a crime. I don’t think you intend to imply any of those things, but you do seem to veer in that direction. How people’s identity is created is still an open question — and someday we may know more. That said, I agree with you that medical interventions for children is very very premature and should not be happening. Let people grow up first. You seem to imply that biology supports a simple dichotomy, but sexual expression is more complex than that. As for cultural/religious acceptance, Joseph Campbell, in The Hero Of A Thousand Faces, discusses some civilizations that saw gender as fluid and containing both male and female elements.One more thought: although Plato then, and others now, did raise questions about democracy, I fear that the Republican answer is to emulate the worst counter-examples, such as their current infatuation with Orbán’s near dictatorship. Prof. Haidt mentioned Karen Stenner’s work, The Authoritarian Dynamic, in which she reports that 20% of the population has an authoritarian personality type. She also talks about the conditions that stimulate it to express itself — fear and anxiety, the kind that is stirred up by demagogues and unscrupulous politicians, namely Trump. Stenner’s book also has suggestions on how to tamp down the fear. Maybe a conversation with her is in order.Thanks for the tip. My best response to my reader’s first point is probably at the beginning of my chat with Bari, where I try to make distinctions between the gay and trans movements, and why the conflicts are inevitable and intrinsic. As for fluid gender, I agree! I don’t believe in a gender binary, just a sex binary. In fact, one reason gender expression exists at all — and is comprehensible at all — is precisely its tension with a fixed, binary biological reality. But I also think this over-states the relevance of “gender identity” for the vast majority of humans. Most of us don’t get up every day thinking of how we are a man or a woman and where we fit on a spectrum — because we don’t really have many conflicts. This looms much larger for trans people for whom it is a daily challenge, and to a lesser extent for gay people whose affect contrasts with the stereotypes of their sex. But for most of us, our gender expression is simply our personality packaged in a binary form of biology. And this isn’t just on a scale of Barbie to G.I. Joe. And seeing it that way — as gender ideology does — strikes me as a regression, not a way forward.This next listener “loved the Haidt interview, except for one jarring bit”:You pronounced the Chinese as stupid for suddenly pursuing Zero Covid. Here’s a scary possibility: They know something you don’t know. Suppose the Chinese detected a Covid variant with a 20% death rate, rather than 1.5%. Gotta save face, gotta stamp it out. What we’re seeing is a reasonable consequence. Or it could be a variant immune to SinoVac. I’m not laughing at them, and, with difficulty, not yet condemning them. I’m worrying.Chill, baby, chill. The chances of a virus crossing from animals to animals to humans in the next decades of rapid climate change is very high. The chances of it wiping out humanity is not negligible. F**k with the planet the way we have, and the planet is at some point going to f**k you. I know this sounds fatalistic — but in my adult lifetime, I’ve contracted two new viruses, both of which have killed millions. This next listener worries about the political center in America regaining control:There was much to agree with in your Dishcast with Haidt about the effects of social media, particularly with regards to how it amplifies polarization. But this analysis feels a bit like blaming kerosene for a fire instead of the arsonist. The biggest share of responsibility for where we are today lies at the feet of the center-right, center-left, and the institutions that supported them. Free trade, the war on terrorism, the Iraq war, the financial crisis, and the extremely tepid recovery thereafter were all the brainchildren of the center and various elite institutions. They have been complete and utter disasters for most Americans. What is more, the outright refusal of many to take accountability for these disasters — indeed the doubling down and moralizing tone in Haidt’s defense of the center — only leads to greater resentment and polarization. If these are the people who are expected to lead us into brighter days, we are doomed.Point taken. Lastly, a listener looks ahead to our next episode:First I wish you a speedy recovery from Covid and your hip surgery. Please do rest sufficiently; I know a lot of people who neglected to do that and are now paying the price.I am a recent subscriber. After listening to a gazillion of your podcasts on Spotify, I realized it was the decent thing to do! Although I do not always agree with you (especially on the EU, which you seem to misunderstand), I want to thank you for your work and for broadening my horizons, i.e. about gay culture, which I ignorantly thought was synonymous with gay pride parades. And please continue to invite people you disagree with — it’s such an important message, even though, frankly, those episodes are not always the most interesting ones.Since you are talking to one of my intellectual heroes in your next episode, Francis Fukuyama, I was wondering if I could suggest one or two questions. His End of History and the Last Man is still widely misrepresented by people who either never read it or willingly distort it. Fukuyama is actually one of the very few people who foresaw the possibility of what we are going through now — in that very book. Yet his responses to these deeply ignorant and unfair criticisms are, in every interview of him I have ever read or heard, unfailingly courteous, measured and constructive. I am just wondering how he does it. I would have blown my top. Where does he get the energy?Although of course he’ll talk about his latest book, if I can make an additional suggestion, please get him to talk about Political Order, his magnum opus in two volumes, and how he responds to the very different views developed in Graeber and Wengrow’s Dawn of Everything. I look forward to hearing you again, when you feel better!Yes, he’s a model of reason and restraint. And thanks for the tips. We won’t have time to debate his many works, but I’ll do my best. Get full access to The Weekly Dish at andrewsullivan.substack.com/subscribe

Culture does not eat strategy for breakfast. The fifth and final episode in a series on the definition of strategy.If you're listening on Apple, please leave a rating and review.Follow Mitchell Muncy on LinkedIn or Twitter.Receive twice-monthly emails on strategy. Sign up at TheSuccessfulStrategist.com.Previous episodeDefining Strategy: Testing Hypotheses (S3:E23)Related episodesFit, the Fourth Element of Strategy (S1:E14)Real Strategy Development (S1:E16)Other resourcesDrucker Foundation, Did Peter Drucker Say That?Nicholas Christakis, What Do We Learn from Our Networks?__________   The Successful Strategist is a production of Prospera LLC, a consulting firm providing strategy development, non-profit due diligence, crisis management, and interim executive management to mission-driven organizations and philanthropists.

He is the Sterling Professor of Social and Natural Science at Yale, where he directs the Human Nature Lab and co-directs the Yale Institute for Network Science. His latest book is "Apollo’s Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live," and also check out "Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society." We talk Covid, plagues, and friendship as a virtue. Get full access to The Weekly Dish at andrewsullivan.substack.com/subscribe

Debbie Weil brings Nicholas Christakis back on the show  for an update on all things COVID. Their conversation one year ago was one of the most popular episodes of Season 3. Nicholas is a Sterling Professor of Social and Natural Science at Yale. He's a physician, a sociologist, and a public health expert and he's the bestselling author of several books, including, most recently, Apollo's Arrow, about the coronavirus pandemic. The book is out in paperback, with a new Preface and a new Afterword. Debbie wanted to ask Nicholas where are we now with the COVID-19 pandemic, where are we going, and what does this all mean in an historical context.She could listen to Nicholas all day as he weaves together the history, the science, the epidemiology, the psychology and the sociology of pandemics, or plagues as he calls them. Not surprisingly, he's an in-demand expert for commentary about the coronavirus pandemic. Vaccines were widely available when the two spoke a year ago. Debbie, like many others, thought that meant the beginning of the end of the pandemic. Not quite, Nicholas said at the time. He was spot on in his predictions, saying that not until 2024 would the pandemic be behind us. A year later, he says we are finally through phase one of the pandemic. He expects we'll reach herd immunity several months from now.He and Debbie discuss Long COVID, whether we should still be wearing masks, the continuing importance of getting thrice vaccinated, what metric to pay the most attention to (number of deaths per day),  addressing disinformation around this pandemic, and more. He notes that historically there has been a confluence of disasters associated with plagues, including war, famine, and climate change.When the war against Ukraine erupted, he was astounded but also not surprised. World War I accompanied the 1918 pandemic. This time, Ukraine and climate change are the accompanying global disasters.Nicholas ends by reminding us that plagues are not rare and may continue to become more present in our lifetime – but that we have the tools and technology to get through them.Tune in for a fascinating conversation about where we are now with the COVID pandemic. About Nicholas ChristakisWikipediaTwitterYale UniversityTed TalksHuman Nature Lab at YaleMentioned in this episode or useful:New paperback edition: Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live by Nicholas Christakis (Little, Brown Spark, Oct. 2021) [B]OLDER S3-EP21: Nicholas Christakis on How the Pandemic Will Affect Your Life Until 2024 COVID Will Reshape Humanity (interview with Amanpour & Co., Dec. 21, 2021)  Note from DebbieIf you've been enjoying the podcast, please consider leaving a short review on Apple Podcasts. It takes less than two minutes and it really makes a difference. It makes me feel loved and it also attracts new listeners.Subscribe to my newsletter and get my free writing guide: https://bitly.com/debbie-free-guide.Connect with me:Website: debbieweil.comTwitter: @debbieweilInstagram: @debbieweilFacebook: @debbieweilLinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/debbieweilBlog: Gap Year After SixtyEmail: thebolderpodcast@gmail.comDebbieWe are looking for a sponsor or a podcast networkIf you are interested in reaching a smart and thoughtful audience of midlife, and older, listeners, contact Debbie Weil.Media PartnersNext For MeEncore.orgMEASupport this podcast:Leave a review on Apple Podcasts: it will help us find a sponsor! If you are interested, contact Debbie WeilSubscribe via Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Stitcher or SpotifyCreditsHost: Debbie WeilProducer: Far Out MediaPodcast websiteMusic: Lakeside Path by Duck Lake

Scapegoating particular communities during an epidemic — be it tuberculosis, HIV or COVID-19 — is nothing new. Outbreaks of disease are often accompanied by the demonizing of some portion of humanity that is supposedly the source of the contagion. They are to blame.Must it be this way? Why do we feel the need to point the finger at each other when threatened like this — even when the threat is ultimately not from people but from viruses or bacteria? And what does this sort of blanket indictment during a health crisis have in common with cancel culture? Host Amna Khalid discusses these pressing issues with Nicholas Christakis, the Sterling Professor of Social and Natural Science, Internal Medicine & Biomedical Engineering at Yale University, and the author of Apollo’s Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live, now out in paperback.TRANSCRIPTDONALD TRUMP: Covid-19 — that name gets further and further away from China, as opposed to calling it the “Chinese virus.” [Cheers]...it’s got all different names: Wuhan…...Chinese virus......Kung flu, yes. [Cheers] Kung flu...AMNA KHALID: That was former president Donald Trump taking every opportunity to suggest that the coronavirus was spread by China — rather than by American apathy and incompetence. Of course, scapegoating particular communities during an epidemic — be it tuberculosis, HIV or Covid — is nothing new. Outbreaks of disease are often accompanied by the demonizing of some portion of humanity that is supposedly the source of the contagion. They are to blame.Must it be this way? Why do we feel the need to point the finger at each other when threatened like this — even when the threat is ultimately not from people but from viruses or bacteria? And what does this sort of blanket indictment during a health crisis have in common with cancel culture?Joining me to talk about the connection is Nicholas Christakis, the Sterling Professor of Social and Natural Science, Internal Medicine & Biomedical Engineering education at Yale University. A sociologist and a physician, Christakis directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale and is the author of Apollo’s Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live. He is also a keen critic of cancel culture, especially as it's playing out on college campuses.Nicholas, thanks for being here.NICHOLAS CHRISTAKIS: Thank you so much for having me.KHALID: We’re in the middle of a pandemic. Some people think we're towards the end of it, but I believe you describe it as towards the end of the beginning of the pandemic, which I, as an historian of medicine, would very much agree with having studied how epidemics play out. But shortly after we were hit by COVID, you wrote a most phenomenal book called Apollo's Arrow, and I was struck by how quickly you were able to put together what you were seeing, both of how the virus was progressing and the kinds of ways in which it was impacting our society. So can you tell me a little bit about what led you to write that book?CHRISTAKIS: What happened was I had a long standing collaboration with some Chinese scientists. We had been studying phone data that tracks people's social interactions and their movements, doing a bunch of research on different topics. And it dawned on us in January of 2020 we could use that data to study the spread of the virus. And we scrambled, beginning January 15th, to write a paper that was eventually published in April in the journal Nature about how the flow of people through Wuhan perfectly predicted the timing, intensity, and location of the epidemic throughout China through the end of February. So as a result of this, I was paying attention to this virus very early on. And as a result of that, became aware of the fact that on January 24th the Chinese promulgated regulations that required 930 million people to stay at home. In other words, the Chinese saw in the virus an enemy of sufficient magnitude that they basically detonated a social nuclear weapon to stop it. And this really got my attention. Of course, I knew the history of epidemic disease having studied that. And I was following what Chinese, and soon after, Italian scientists were putting online. It was very clear to me this was going to be a serious epidemic. And meanwhile, our public discourse was very minimalizing. The president of the United States was saying it'll go away, which is ridiculous. Any expert knew that was false. So I began to send out Twitter threads with sort of basic EPI 101 information about here's what happens with respiratory pandemics. Here's what's going to unfold and so on. And to my amazement, several of those went viral. I think there was a hunger in the United States for sort of basic scientific information about respiratory pandemics. By the middle of March, I began to redirect all the efforts of my lab towards the pandemic — or most of the efforts, not all — March the 15th, I started writing the book and it was due July the 15th, four months later. That was Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live. And the reason I was able to write the book so swiftly, I think, is that so much is known about respiratory pandemics. I mean, the thing to understand is that this experience so many of us are having and this way we've come to live right now, which feels so alien and unnatural, is not. Plagues are not new to our species. They're just new to us. We think this is crazy — what's happening — but that's ridiculous. Humans have been interacting with pandemic disease for centuries. I mean, they're in the Bible. They're in the Iliad. The canonical work of Western fiction begins with a plague. They’re in Shakespeare. They’re in Cervantes. This is a part of the human experience. And there is therefore expertise — both human experience and in our religious traditions, in our literary traditions and also scientific expertise, as you mentioned, in medical historians, in epidemiologists. People know. We know about these things. Therefore, pretty much everything that has happened, almost without exception, has been foreseeable.KHALID: So, as I was reading the book, Nicholas — and for our listeners, I should mention that the paperback version of the book has just come out with a new preface. And if you're listening to this episode, you should go out and get a version because there are substantive differences, I think, between the hardback and the paperback. But I want to go back to the book itself. And when I was reading it, what I was struck by was how you explain these really complicated, scientific things in a very accessible fashion. But to my heart, what speaks to me is how you bring precisely what you mentioned — the history of how humans have coped with pandemics — into the frame. Because in our own lifetimes, we've been fortunate in that we have not seen anything of this scale. We've seen, you know, the SARS-1. We've seen a few other — Ebola. But, particularly in the U.S., we've been pretty insulated, I'd say, compared to other historical times. And I just found it fascinating how you were able to weave that into a discussion of what's happening right now. One of the things that I do when I'm teaching my history of medicine course is I tell my students that historians are interested in epidemics precisely because they reveal the fault lines of society. It's like that pressure point where everything that is papering over differences kind of evaporates and you can see what's going on. And we saw that happen this time too. Particular communities get scapegoated. Can you say a little bit about that? I mean, we've heard our prior president talk about the virus as a “China virus,” as “kung flu.” There is demonization of certain peoples.CHRISTAKIS: One of the things that's so interesting about plagues is that they have a biological and epidemiological existence, but, as you're pointing out, they also have a sociological existence. They bring with them certain psychological, economic, and sociological impacts, which are pretty much invariant. For example, plagues are a time of denial and lies. We see denial and lies for thousands of years. People have said that we have accounts from bubonic plague outbreaks from, you know, 1500 years ago where observers say it's crazy. There's all this superstition around what's happening, you know. Or the emergence of quacks, you know, who sell nostrums to cure the plague that even people in real time observe doesn't work, for example. So the emergence of lies and denial is typical. Fear is typical. Grief — the grief making power of plagues, sort of depression. Marcus Aurelius writes about a plague in Rome, about how worse even than the deaths was the kind of sense of depression that had settled over the city. All of these things that we're experiencing on a psychosocial plane are things that have been observed with plagues in the past. And as you're highlighting, one further such thing is this notion of blame, because during times of plague, it is stereotypic to blame others. During, for example, the bubonic plague, the Jews were blamed, right? There was an ascendant antisemitism. Countless Jews in many cities were burned at the stake or buried alive, blamed wrongly — of course — for the plague. During HIV, for example, gays were blamed or Haitians were blamed or IV drug users were blamed. And during this epidemic, we've seen that Asians are blamed or migrants are blamed. Part of the reason, I think, psychodynamically we are so eager and willing to blame others is that the alternatives are more frightening. So another alternative is that the plague is the workings of an implacable God, right? That God is bringing annihilation to us, right? That's scary. Or another alternative is that the plague is the inexorable workings of the natural world. Well that's frightening too. Whereas if you imagine that human agency is responsible, that some other humans are causing the plague, then you might imagine, in a soothing sort of way, that human agency might cause the plague to remit, that there's something we can do to stop it. But even within the category of blame — this issue of who gets blamed and why do we blame certain other groups of humans? On the one hand, there have been voices that have said kill the other. The other is responsible. There have also always been voices that have said no, that's not the case. For example, even during the first outbreak of bubonic plague in the 1340s, Pope Clement VI, during this wave of anti-Semitism, in an astonishing set of statements for a sitting pope — by the way, he comported himself remarkably humanely during this whole episode, taking great personal risk, having real sorrow and sympathy for the plight of human beings — he observed, just very logically, he goes, it couldn't possibly be the Jews that are responsible because they're also dying. You know, just very basic reasoning, you know, like the plague is killing everyone. Why would the Jews be doing this to themselves? Or Saint Cyprian — and I'll just read this — people have often said, well, why wouldn't the emergence of a common threat — like a plague is like a shared enemy — why wouldn't it bind human beings together? So here is an observation by Saint Cyprian. During the third century of the common era, there was another plague in Rome. Rome was about a million people in those days, which is astonishing. 5,000 people a day were dying, and Saint Cyprian said, “It disturbs some that this mortality is common to us with others; and yet what is there in this world which is not common to us with others...So long as we are here in the world, we are associated with the human race in fleshly equality.” This idea that we're all together in this, facing this common threat, we shouldn't allow ourselves to be divided by these superficial differences, this tension between no, there shouldn't be a bright line between us and them, or yes, there should be a bright line between us and them is also an ancient feature of plagues.KHALID: I'm loving the fact that you're drawing out this tension because I think this tension is at the heart of how we deal with pandemics. You've got these two forces contending with each other. At one level, you've got people — even during the Black Death — who believed that this is a curse from God for not caring for the poor. But coming back to the implications of scapegoating and essentially, you know, for banishing people — people have been banished during times of pandemics and for chronic illnesses as well. There is the idea of “leper” colonies and people who were sent away who were suffering from leprosy. And it was not just a physical death that they were sent towards, but there is very distinctly a social death that takes place. Can you comment and reflect on that a little bit in light of what's happening today as well?CHRISTAKIS: If you think about it, short of killing someone or maiming them, ostracizing them is a very powerful sanction. Ostracism comes from the Greek word ostrakon, which means little shards of pottery that they would write someone's name in to ostracize. Or there are many traditional societies where a witchdoctor, a traditional healer, might sort of identify who is the person who is responsible for the woes in our group, and that person would be cast out. Or sailors' accounts, you know, of why a ship has suffered a calamity, and it must be because this person on our ship is bad, that person would be flung overboard, for example. So there are many, many ways in which this idea of purging a group of an individual might somehow represent a kind of catharsis. And be, by the way, a very serious sanction to the person that was sent out, whether guilty or innocent. Many of the examples I just gave are innocent people being sacrificed for the benefits of the group. Sometimes they are guilty parties and we don't want to execute them, but let's say we'll banish them, which was a bad, bad sanction in old days. Now, the reason it's such a bad sanction is that we are actually social animals. It is very vulnerable to be on your own. To be cast out of a group and to have to survive on your own elicits a lot of very serious anxieties in human beings because, in our ancestral past, to be on your own was risky. So banishment, whether as a punishment for a bona fide crime or as a kind of immoral, I would say, act of purification — I mean, you see this in, for example, in the Cultural Revolution, you know where people were picked from a group and everyone else got to feel good because they cast out this person. This is a perverse reflection of a very fundamental human fear and even a human tendency.KHALID: Yeah, there is a kind of in-group and outgroup, right? This kind of tribalism that suddenly can get very starkly reinforced.CHRISTAKIS: We see that also, by the way, in the suboptimal way our country has responded to the pandemic. So, for example, in my view, we have needlessly politicized things like mask wearing and vaccination. I think it's wonderful that we live in a plural democracy. We have a range of political beliefs about all kinds of topics. And we resolve our differences how? Not by force of arms, we vote. That's what we do in our society. We vote to resolve our differences. And I would rather live in the kind of heterogeneous political pluralism than in a political monoculture. So I like the fact that we have a civilized way — to the extent possible — of resolving our differences, which is terrific. But this idea that you're going to signal your political affiliation by whether you choose to get vaccinated or not is really dumb. The vaccine should be seen as a kind of technocratic, apolitical tool. If people wanted to politicize whether you got Moderna or Pfizer, I think that would still be stupid. But if they want to politicize whether you get a vaccine at all, I mean, I think that's just not only illogical but self-injurious.KHALID: We've talked about this tension and this tribalism that is present, but I would argue that the coronavirus or a disease is a historical agent in its own right in that it acts and causes change in a way that exacerbates existing tendencies and sometimes even sows the seeds — it's not just exacerbation — but sometimes even sows the seeds of new kinds of rifts within society. How would you respond to that?CHRISTAKIS: Anything that puts stress on a society, whether a war or a famine or a natural disaster like a major earthquake or a plague highlights divisions or stresses in a society. It can also elicit wonderful qualities. There's a whole literature on the communities that form in the wake of disaster, for example. So, when people are flung out of a city and they're living in a camp and how they help each other out, you know. There are, of course, criminals and thieves and others who take advantage of the situation, but people tend to bond together in these types of things. I think that the virus struck us at a particularly vulnerable moment from the point of view of the intellectual fabric of our society. So there were a number of macro trends that were happening. First of all, we were at century level highs of economic inequality. We had historically very high levels of political polarization, which political scientists have documented. Those were in the background. In addition, we had a kind of anti-elitism — partly reflecting that inequality — and swept up in that anti-elitism was a kind of anti-scientism. Scientists were seen as just another kind of elite that was feeding at the public trough, which is kind of, in my view, a wrong way to see scientists. It's like seeing judges as an elite. You know, like the judges are feeding at the public trough because they're paid by our taxes. Well no, we don't see judges as a constituency, right? We don't see judges as an interest group. Some people have come to see scientists that way. And we also, as a nation, seem to have lost the capacity for nuance, right? Like we had these conversations in which everything is black or white or you’re with me or you're against me, again reflecting the kind of politicization of so many of our disagreements, as you just said. So all of these things were happening in our society when the virus struck. And I think it really exploited that. I think many more thousands of Americans died because we were unable as a nation to come together, and, by the way, in my view, with the previous administration, were poorly led at the level of the White House. We were not well led. You could have come and you could have said, you know, the American people are being attacked by this external virus. We need to come together to rebuff this. We need to work together as a nation. There's a kind of appeal — almost a jingoistic appeal — that could have been made that I think would have been appealing to the right and the left politically that could have worked. I do fault the White House, but there were Democratic governors who also did a lousy job — and mayors. But the White House is the White House, right? I think the inability of the White House to organize an effective national response is sort of the flip side of the unwillingness of much of the citizenry to face up to the unpleasant reality. The plague struck and exploited or exacerbated a variety of ongoing problems in our society.KHALID: When you wrote your book and the hardcover came out, at that point, the lab leak theory was really pooh-poohed and wasn't really something that was being considered as a possibility. And between that and your next edition, people are thinking differently about it or new evidence has come to light. Could you reflect on where you stand right now on that?CHRISTAKIS: People early on were saying that there was no evidence that this was an engineered bioweapon. I think those people advancing that theory were seen as a little bit of like conspiracy theorists. When you make extraordinary claims, you need to have some evidence for the claim. Many people acknowledge that it was possible that this was a leak from a lab, but they thought — and I was one of them — that it was more likely that this was a zoonotic leap rather than a lab leak. So one theory is that this was a virus that was brought back from the wild into the laboratory for study and then inadvertently leaked. And that is, by the way, still possible. We don't have good evidence one way or the other. And certainly, Chinese secrecy about this raises suspicions. The other idea is that there was some unobserved natural leap from a bat to a human probably in sort of the second half of 2019. And that theory, I think, is still more likely, partly because we know there are many such zoonotic leaps. You mentioned some. Ebola is a zoonotic leap. SARS-1 in 2003 was a zoonotic leap. Influenza is a zoonotic leap. Zika virus, hantavirus, HIV. All of these things we've all lived through, these are all zoonotic leaps, well documented zoonotic leaps. It happens and it's happening increasingly. In fact, there's some evidence that the zoonotic leaps are happening increasingly partly because of climate change, if you can believe it. So there's a deep connection between climate change and pandemic disease. And so, I still think that is probably what happened in this case, but I can't be sure. There's no reason to politicize this. We'll go wherever the evidence leads us. I mean, I don't have a political dog in this fight.KHALID: But this is the part that's interesting, right? Like you said, we can wait for the evidence, but there is this tendency, again, to go down that blame route, to try and see it as maliciously intentioned and something that has a conspiracy behind it. With HIV, in your book, you were reflecting on how the gay population got scapegoated and you said it just so happens that the virus settles in a particular community and that is the one that gets stigmatized. It's not necessarily inherently anything about that community. Another kind of parallel movement in our society, particularly American society, where cancelations are on the rise, where somehow there is this fear of contagion of ideas, and therefore we can't even bear to listen to anyone who holds a viewpoint that is contrary to us, and we must banish them. You know, we must cancel them. It's happening all around us, but it's happening in institutions of higher education which should be the places where we slow down, take a step back, and like you said, wait for the evidence and think things through. But that's not what's going on. Do you see similar dynamics in our social ways of dealing with difference?CHRISTAKIS: You know, the contagion of ideas can be modeled in ways similar to the contagion of germs. And my laboratory has done a lot of work on spreading processes and social networks. We've developed a lot of data sets and mathematical models and ideas that are highly relevant to understanding such phenomena. On the issue of silencing one's opponents, the desire to silence one’s opponents is a very primitive and ancient desire as well. But I think it's a weak desire. You know, if you're so confident in the integrity and validity of your ideas, win the battle of ideas. Argue. Bring evidence and data and rhetoric and logic to the field of battle and win. It's only people who lack confidence, in my view, who actually secretly suspect that maybe their ideas are not valid, that seek to silence their opponents, to prevent their opponents from speaking.And we see this on the right and on the left. For example, on the right they don't want to fund gun research, gun epidemiology research. Why would you not want to fund basic research on how guns kill people? Well, maybe you're afraid that if we find such evidence, it might lead to new policies that you disagree with. And rather than winning the battle of ideas and arguing about the policies, you're like, well, let's just suppress the evidence. Same with climate change. On the left, things having to do with gender, the biological reality of sex, for example. People would rather suppress such evidence or contort such evidence rather than engage with the evidence in a very, you know, mature way and recognize the subtleties and the nuance in any of these topics. Or in behavior, genetics is another topic that the left doesn't want to explore — you know, the role of genetics in human behavior. This is weak minded, in my view. I would rather have a full airing of people's ideas. And I would rather try to create institutions in our societies like universities, which are special places for such airing. And incidentally, as James Mill famously said, “He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of it.”Your ideas get stronger when you test them against opponents. Why — when you fight in martial arts, why do you bow to your opponent? You're grateful to your opponent for giving you an opportunity to perfect your own skills. You couldn't do that without an opponent, right? It's the same in intellectual battle — you need to test your ideas. Whether it's scientific claims about the world or philosophical stances about the world, I think they get better in the crucible of contention. And so, this is why I am gravely concerned that there are many topics which have become taboo on university campuses, on the left and on the right. It's below a great nation like ours, and it's below our best universities to fall prey to such desires, to create a culture of censorship. What happens typically is that someone is cast out. Like someone is identified for like a minor delict and is cast out, and that has a real silencing effect on everyone else. People are oh, better not discuss that topic. The costs are too high of discussing that topic, and it's dropped.KHALID: Yeah, this is an excellent point, and I've actually had a few people push back and say well, you know, there’re not that many professors who've been canceled recently, if you count the numbers compared to the proportion. It's not about the actual numbers of people who are being canceled, but those who are subsequently silenced and who are self-censoring for fear of being canceled. There is this parallel of the fear that we're facing with the pandemic and this fear that is now being cultivated through these kinds of cancelations and scapegoating of people.CHRISTAKIS: I may bungle this example, and there may be listeners of yours who know more about it. But my understanding of training to become a SEAL — you know, an elite warrior — is that there is an exercise early on in that training where they throw all the men and women into the water and there's a little raft and everyone has been issued like a little tripod and you start treading water. And they tell them all, you will all tread water until one of you climbs up onto this raft and sets up their little tripod and rings the bell and gives up. Then we'll let the rest of you out of the water. And these soldiers tread water for 24 hours until finally one person gives up. So the SEAL — the trainers are willing to sacrifice one guy early on for the benefits of solidarity that accrue to everyone else, where everyone else feels we made it. We're good material. It's us. You know, we are now us because we have symbolically cast out a member of our erstwhile community. People get this kind of free zone, this kind of sense of solidarity by sacrificing someone. And many of these cases of cancelation that we have seen have this element. There's a case at the Yale Law School right now where a Native American student who's politically on the right sent out, innocently — we now have on record that he was unaware that his lighthearted party invitation could be seen by some other people as having racist connotations. He referred to having a party at his “trap house.” This is a slang I was previously unfamiliar with, but if you look it up, it's been used by many people with nonracial connotations for quite a long time now. Its primary definition does not have racial connotations. He mentioned the foodstuffs that would be available, which included apple pie and fried chicken at this event. Turns out he didn't even pick the fried chicken. It was a convenient fast food store near their house. One of his roommates had made that selection. He sends out an announcement, and nine people at Yale Law School — primarily African Americans — were so offended by this that they reported him to some deans who then called the student in and tried to engineer an apology from him. And then the student was denounced by this body within the university that his email was racist and pejorative, even though on record — we now have audiotapes of the conversation. It was clear he had no idea. And they told him they believed him that he had no idea. Nevertheless, they denounced him. And then everyone is circling the wagons now, reading his actions in the most uncharitable way. To me, this seems like a situation in which they're trying to cast out an innocent person in order to make themselves feel better and build group solidarity and police the margins of acceptable discourse. All of which is wrong, in my view.KHALID: You know, the irony is that this is happening at a law school, which is all about teaching students how to pass out evidence, how to think through who is responsible, and how you hold them responsible. And also, one of the key elements of legal schooling is to learn there is the action but then there is the intention. And you cannot discount the intention. The intention is what makes the difference between the verdict for manslaughter versus murder. CHRISTAKIS: Yes.KHALID: Somehow that has been completely erased from our conversation right now.CHRISTAKIS: There was no due process. There was no right to confront your accusers. It was so unlawyerly from start to finish, as far as I can tell, ignoring some of these philosophical elements that are so important in our jurisprudence. It's embarrassing. And furthermore, some of the students claim that this party invitation from this guy was physically harmful to them, they claimed, in a kind of histrionic language that I think needs to be called for what it is. They use the term “never again,” which is a phrase we usually use when talking about genocide. We say genocide should never happen again. These are very extreme statements, really unwarranted in this type of a situation. The uncharitable reading, the witch hunt mentality, the over involvement of administrators in business they really shouldn't be involving themselves in, the attempts at forced apology — you know, they drafted an apology note for him to sign and then threatened him with reporting him to the bar if he didn't sign it. There's so many elements of this case that are just shameful.KHALID: The parallels are really striking between how communities and pandemics are scapegoated and how people, right now, for their speech are being ostracized and being blamed. And the implications — what we were talking about earlier about a social death — are very real because these kinds of cancelations and attacks and censorship have implications for people's lives in very real ways.CHRISTAKIS: Just imagine being widely reviled. I mean, it's one thing if you are a murderer and you're widely reviled. Imagine if you're not. There was a case at Dartmouth a few years ago of a chair of a department of psychology who was wrongly accused of being complicit — falsely and wrongly accused of being complicit in sexual harassment done by other professors. And he was rejected by the local community. People would see him in the grocery store and take it upon themselves to denounce him. And this man eventually took his own life. I mean, this is appalling. It is extremely painful to be cast out of a community. And it is not a light sanction to impose, especially unjustly. This is not a civilized way to act, in my view. I think there are better ways to handle the stumbles that people sometimes make around many hot button issues in our society. And I would especially like to see us do better at our best universities.KHALID: Thank you, Nicholas. I feel like that's a good way to converge the two conversations. Thank you so much for joining us today.CHRISTAKIS: Amna, thank you so much for having me. KHALID: Nicholas Christakis is a physician, a professor at Yale, and author of Apollo’s Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live — which is now out in paperback. It’s a book I highlighly recommend to all Banished listeners. My conversation with Christakis, as you heard, called to mind the protocol for casting out those suffering from leprosy in Medieval England. Here is an excerpt from a set  of instructions used by the diocese at Salisbury for banishing a “leper” —  in the parlance of the time:The priest casts earth on each of his feet saying “Be thou dead to the world, but alive again unto God.” Then the priest must lead him from the church to his house as a dead man, chanting libre me Domine, in such ways that the sick man is covered with a black cloth. Then when he comes into the open fields … he ends by imposing prohibitions on him in the following manner:I forbid you to ever enter churches or go into a market or a mill or in any assemblies of people.I forbid you henceforth to go out without your leper’s dress, that you may be recognised by others; and you must not go outside your house unshod.I forbid you henceforth to eat or drink in any company except that of lepers.I would encourage you to heed the advice of Nicholas Christakis and imagine being reviled by many thousands of people for some perceived transgression. Really sit with that for a while and then ask yourself: Are the judgements of Medieval clergy so different from those of Twitter mobs or university administrators today? Is one social death really less painful than another? Less barbaric? Less, oh, I don’t know, medieval? Please support the work we do at Booksmart Studios by becoming a paying subscriber, and get access to full interviews, bonus segments, and more.Don’t forget to rate and share what you've heard here today on whichever platform you listen on and leave a comment so we know what you think. Our success here at Booksmart depends as much on you as on us.Banished is produced by Matthew Schwartz and Mike Vuolo. And I, as always, am Amna Khalid. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit banished.substack.com/subscribe

My guest today is Nicholas Christakis. Nicholas is a physician, a sociologist, and a professor at Yale University. He'll be known to some of you as the professor who kept his composure in front of a mob of students screaming about Halloween costumes back in 2015 or he may be known to you as the author of many books, including "Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social networks and How they shape our lives", "Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society" and "Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live", which will be the focal point of our conversation today.Nicholas and I talk about how the polarized media has harmed our ability to deal with COVID. We talk about the end goal of herd immunity. We talk about whether the incredible speed of the rollout of the vaccine is suspicious. We talk about the ethics of requiring or strongly pressuring people to get the vaccine. We talked about the ethics of encouraging booster shots when many around the world have yet to get their first vaccination. We also discuss Ivermectin and much more.I hope you enjoy this conversation as much as I did.

Nicholas A. Christakis is the Sterling Professor of Social and Natural Science at Yale University, where he also directs the Human Nature Lab, and serves as Co-Director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. His most recent book is Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live. https://www.amazon.com/Apollos-Arrow-Profound-Enduring-Coronavirus/dp/0316628212

Nicholas Christakis is a sociologist and physician known for his research on social networks and on the socioeconomic, biosocial, and evolutionary determinants of behavior, health, and longevity. He is the Sterling Professor of Social and Natural Science at Yale University, where he directs the Human Nature Lab. He is also the Co-Director of the Yale Institute for Network Science.