Podcast appearances and mentions of Razib Khan

And now for something completely different…Razib Khan, beyond being a fine friend of pod, is an excellent genetic historian. He's written a fascinating article about how Europe once had a burgeoning civilization…thousands of years before history as we know it began. We just haven't understood much about a once thriving continent because these societies were largely wiped out by the people who became “Europeans”. These revelations turn a lot of conventional historical wisdom about ancient history on its head. Quoting Razib: Neolithic Europe was one of Eurasia's most advanced regions 5,000 years ago, nearly on par with the Near East, matching India and surpassing China in material terms. In some domains, like gold-work, Europe was the pioneer. We may have forgotten this Europe, but it was hardly a backwater. It was a central engine of world civilization 5,000 years ago.Through the magic of modern technology, we're getting new insights into this lost world. With increasing clarity, we're also seeing just how brutal human life was in pre modernity. It's not sports or media exactly, but I just had to discuss this all with Razib. I believe it's important information and I can't stop thinking about it. Topics include: * Where everybody came from* How nobody is really from anywhereThanks for reading House of Strauss! This post is public so feel free to share it. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.houseofstrauss.com/subscribe

In this podcast, Kushal speaks with Razib Khan about the recent debate surrounding H1B visas in America and the tsunami of racism being hurled against Indians by a section of the MAGA support base. Follow Razib: Twitter: @razibkhan Substack: https://razib.substack.com/ #h1bvisas #trump #elonmusk ------------------------------------------------------------ Listen to the podcasts on: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/kushal-mehra-99891819 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1rVcDV3upgVurMVW1wwoBp Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-c%C4%81rv%C4%81ka-podcast/id1445348369 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-carvaka-podcast ------------------------------------------------------------ Support The Cārvāka Podcast: Buy Kushal's Book: https://amzn.in/d/58cY4dU Become a Member on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKPx... Become a Member on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/carvaka UPI: kushalmehra@icici Interac Canada: kushalmehra81@gmail.com To buy The Carvaka Podcast Exclusive Merch please visit: http://kushalmehra.com/shop ------------------------------------------------------------ Follow Kushal: Twitter: https://twitter.com/kushal_mehra?ref_... Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KushalMehraO... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thecarvakap... Koo: https://www.kooapp.com/profile/kushal... Inquiries: https://kushalmehra.com/ Feedback: kushalmehra81@gmail.com

There are many pressing questions plaguing the mind of modern man. Where do we go when we die? What is the meaning of life? Was Christopher Columbus Jewish? Razib Khan, the unofficial geneticist of The Remnant, stops by to answer the latter, arguing that cultural identities are very different from genetic identities. Jonah and Razib get into the 23&Me craze, the Dalai Lama's microaggressions, and genomes from the old world. Plus: what happened to epigenetics, some Nazi myth debunking, and some hard truths for the Hapsburgs and horses. Show Notes: —Razib's piece in The Dispatch —Razib's Substack The Remnant is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including Jonah's G-File newsletter, weekly livestreams, and other members-only content—click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Listen to the full podcast here: https://skmp.supercast.com/As Michaelangelo discovered David deep within a marble block, Razib Khan diligently chisels the fabric of our history through that which cannot lie: our genes. I am fairly certain I burned 2000 calories recording this conversation, Razib is a force to be reckoned with, and his mastery of written and genetic history is such a fucking joy. Probably listen on .75x speed for this one. I will gift a subscription to Razib's Substack to a random listener on March 26th!Follow Razib:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/razibk/X: https://twitter.com/razibkhan Substack: https://www.razibkhan.com/Podcast: Unsupervised Learning Spotify / Apple Podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Omar Ali, Jyoti Rahman, Shafiqur Rahman, Karol Karpinski and Razib Khan discuss the end of the Sheikh Hasina regime.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Against the Guardian's hit piece on Manifest, published by Omnizoid on June 20, 2024 on The Effective Altruism Forum. Crosspost of this on my blog The Guardian recently released the newest edition in the smear rationalists and effective altruists series, this time targetting the Manifest conference. The piece titled "Sam Bankman-Fried funded a group with racist ties. FTX wants its $5m back," is filled with bizarre factual errors, one of which was so egregious that it merited a connection. It's the standard sort of journalist hitpiece on a group: find a bunch of members saying things that sound bad, and then sneeringly report on that as if that discredits the group. It reports, for example, that Scott Alexander attended the conference, and links to the dishonest New York Times smear piece criticizing Scott, as well as a similar hitpiece calling Robin Hanson creepy. It then smears Razib Khan, on the grounds that he once wrote a piece for magazines that are Paleoconservative and anti-immigration (like around half the country). The charges against Steve Hsu are the most embarrassing - they can't even find something bad that he did, so they just mention half-heartedly that there were protests against him. And it just continues like this - Manifest invited X person who has said a bad thing once, or is friends with a bad person, or has written for some nefarious group. If you haven't seen it, I'd recommend checking out Austin's response. I'm not going to go through and defend each of these people in detail, because I think that's a lame waste of time. I want to make a more meta point: articles like this are embarrassing and people should be ashamed of themselves for writing them. Most people have some problematic views. Corner people in a dark alleyway and start asking them why it's okay to kill animals for food and not people (as I've done many times), and about half the time they'll suggest it would be okay to kill mentally disabled orphans. Ask people about why one would be required to save children from a pond but not to give to effective charities, and a sizeable portion of the time, people will suggest that one wouldn't have an obligation to wade into a pond to save drowning African children. Ask people about population ethics, and people will start rooting for a nuclear holocaust. Many people think their worldview doesn't commit them to anything strange or repugnant. They only have the luxury of thinking this because they haven't thought hard about anything. Inevitably, if one thinks hard about morality - or most topics - in any detail, they'll have to accept all sorts of very unsavory implications. In philosophy, there are all sorts of impossibility proofs, showing that we must give up on at least one of a few widely shared intuitions. Take the accusations against Jonathan Anomaly, for instance. He was smeared for supporting what's known as liberal eugenics - gene editing to make people smarter or make sure they don't get horrible diseases. Why is this supposed to be bad? Sure, it has a nasty word in the name, but what's actually bad about it? A lot of people who think carefully about the subject will come to the same conclusions as Jonathan Anomaly, because there isn't anything objectionable about gene editing to make people better off. If you're a conformist who bases your opinion about so called liberal eugenics ( terrible term for it) on the fact that it's a scary term, you'll find Anomaly's position unreasonable, but if you actually think it through, it's extremely plausible, and is even agreed with by most philosophers. Should philosophy conferences be disbanded because too many philosophers have offensive views? I've elsewhere remarked that cancel culture is a tax on being interesting. Anyone who says a lot of things and isn't completely beholden to social co...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Why so many "racists" at Manifest?, published by Austin on June 18, 2024 on The Effective Altruism Forum. Manifest 2024 is a festival that we organized last weekend in Berkeley. By most accounts, it was a great success. On our feedback form, the average response to "would you recommend to a friend" was a 9.0/10. Reviewers said nice things like "one of the best weekends of my life" and "dinners and meetings and conversations with people building local cultures so achingly beautiful they feel almost like dreams" and "I've always found tribalism mysterious, but perhaps that was just because I hadn't yet found my tribe." Arnold Brooks running a session on Aristotle's Metaphysics. More photos of Manifest here. However, a recent post on The Guardian and review on the EA Forum highlight an uncomfortable fact: we invited a handful of controversial speakers to Manifest, whom these authors call out as "racist". Why did we invite these folks? First: our sessions and guests were mostly not controversial - despite what you may have heard Here's the schedule for Manifest on Saturday: (The largest & most prominent talks are on the left. Full schedule here.) And here's the full list of the 57 speakers we featured on our website: Nate Silver, Luana Lopes Lara, Robin Hanson, Scott Alexander, Niraek Jain-sharma, Byrne Hobart, Aella, Dwarkesh Patel, Patrick McKenzie, Chris Best, Ben Mann, Eliezer Yudkowsky, Cate Hall, Paul Gu, John Phillips, Allison Duettmann, Dan Schwarz, Alex Gajewski, Katja Grace, Kelsey Piper, Steve Hsu, Agnes Callard, Joe Carlsmith, Daniel Reeves, Misha Glouberman, Ajeya Cotra, Clara Collier, Samo Burja, Stephen Grugett, James Grugett, Javier Prieto, Simone Collins, Malcolm Collins, Jay Baxter, Tracing Woodgrains, Razib Khan, Max Tabarrok, Brian Chau, Gene Smith, Gavriel Kleinwaks, Niko McCarty, Xander Balwit, Jeremiah Johnson, Ozzie Gooen, Danny Halawi, Regan Arntz-Gray, Sarah Constantin, Frank Lantz, Will Jarvis, Stuart Buck, Jonathan Anomaly, Evan Miyazono, Rob Miles, Richard Hanania, Nate Soares, Holly Elmore, Josh Morrison. Judge for yourself; I hope this gives a flavor of what Manifest was actually like. Our sessions and guests spanned a wide range of topics: prediction markets and forecasting, of course; but also finance, technology, philosophy, AI, video games, politics, journalism and more. We deliberately invited a wide range of speakers with expertise outside of prediction markets; one of the goals of Manifest is to increase adoption of prediction markets via cross-pollination. Okay, but there sure seemed to be a lot of controversial ones… I was the one who invited the majority (~40/60) of Manifest's special guests; if you want to get mad at someone, get mad at me, not Rachel or Saul or Lighthaven; certainly not the other guests and attendees of Manifest. My criteria for inviting a speaker or special guest was roughly, "this person is notable, has something interesting to share, would enjoy Manifest, and many of our attendees would enjoy hearing from them". Specifically: Richard Hanania - I appreciate Hanania's support of prediction markets, including partnering with Manifold to run a forecasting competition on serious geopolitical topics and writing to the CFTC in defense of Kalshi. (In response to backlash last year, I wrote a post on my decision to invite Hanania, specifically) Simone and Malcolm Collins - I've enjoyed their Pragmatist's Guide series, which goes deep into topics like dating, governance, and religion. I think the world would be better with more kids in it, and thus support pronatalism. I also find the two of them to be incredibly energetic and engaging speakers IRL. Jonathan Anomaly - I attended a talk Dr. Anomaly gave about the state-of-the-art on polygenic embryonic screening. I was very impressed that something long-considered scien...

Problematic geneticist Razib Khan returns to A Special Place to discuss the natalist turf wars (trad-caths vs. techno-degenerates), woke women, and the importance of BEING KIND. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit aspecialplace.substack.com/subscribe

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib talks to Colin Wright, a returning guest, host of the Reality's Last Stand Substack and a fellow at the Manhattan Institute. Before digging deep into the biology of sex and the cultural politics of gender ideology, Razib and Wright touch on what's been happening to Jonathan Pruitt, Wright's erstwhile advisor. He was accused of academic fraud in 2019, and dozens of papers where Pruitt was the primary contributor of data had to be retracted. Notably, papers where his mentees collected the data did not suffer from the same problems. Evidence quickly mounted that Pruitt's whole career productivity was built on fraudulent data. As of 2024, Pruitt's university, McMaster, where he had an endowed chair, found him to be guilty of fraud, while his doctoral dissertation from University of Tennessee was withdrawn. He resigned from his university in 2022, and embarked on a fantasy writing career. Today he is the author of the dark fantasy, The Amber Menhir. Then Razib and Wright talk about the current state of gender ideology, and the conflicts around trans rights in the US and abroad. Wright, who is working on a book on sex and gender, believes we may have seen the high tide of gender ideology, with the retreat occuring earlier abroad in places like Britain, where youth medical gender transition has been severely curtailed. He also reviews the major terms and concepts, like the difference between sex and gender, and also what exactly is meant by binary sex and why it is so important in our ability to understand biology generally and patterns in human society specifically. Finally, Razib asks Wright to expound on the different factions in the “gender wars,” from gender critical TERFs to social conservatives and queer theorists. https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. For the first time ever, parents going through IVF can use whole genome sequencing to screen their embryos for hundreds of conditions. Harness the power of genetics to keep your family safe, with Orchid. Check them out at https://orchidhealth.com.

@razibkhan finally breaks the silence on his relationship with Aella

The last time Razib Khan—a geneticist and author of the Unsupervised Learning Substack—appeared on The Remnant to discuss genes and behavior, Jonah couldn't resist focusing their conversation exclusively on canines. Today, Razib is finally back to explore the genetic makeup of the world's second most important animal, human beings. He and Jonah try to keep the science simple and the nudity tasteful as they explore some highfalutin topics: How has our knowledge of genetics evolved over time? What can our genes tell us about our ancestors? And are genes the ultimate predictor of intelligence and disease? Show Notes: - Razib's Substack, Unsupervised Learning - Razib: “The Longer I Live, the Wronger I Get to Be” - Razib interviews Chris Stringer Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.houseofstrauss.comI'm not sure how to describe this free flowing conversation with geneticist and writer Razib Khan, which was to be expected since Zeeb's one of the most brilliant/idiosyncratic people I've ever met. Naturally, this talk is all over the place after beginning with, and I'm not sure there's another way to describe this, social media reaction to “Aella's birthday gangbang”. Topics discussed:* Razib knows the infamous Aella, who's a rationalist data scientist between orgies. * Razib is friends with Aella, but is viscerally disgusted by her lifestyle. * Is human “disgust response” logical? * Is gene editing going to destroy sports? * Very tall people are rarer than it seems* Michael Jordan's “mailman” theory on his own parentage * “Female sperm is heavier” * “The Sports Gene”* Why do men get autism and schizophrenia more frequently than women?* Ashkenazi really do have Middle East ancestry * Is the tech scene right wing? Left wing? * Why Microsoft is killing Google * An analysis of problems at Google

Are Ashkenazi Jews indigenous to the Middle East? Is Palestinian a distinct ethnicity, different to other Arabs? Why do some races have bigger noses or eyes or butts or boobs? Are some ethnicities more homogenous than others? Is inbreeding actually terrible for your genetics or can it make them stronger? All that and more in this episode of the Quillette Cetera podcast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.comRob joins me on the podcast to talk about what it takes to become a writer, “public intellectual,” or however one wants to describe what we do. This conversation can serve as a guide for those who might try to follow a similar path. But even if you're not going to be writing for a living, I think there's still a lot you can get out of our talk, as it served as an opportunity for us to take a step back and reflect on our previous work — and really our lives — up to this point. When we got to the topic of each of our writing processes, I came to realize that we have deep differences regarding how we get motivated, and our approach to life more generally. Rob says don't romanticize the process, while my philosophy is that romanticizing everything is the key to joy and meaning. Writing is something he occasionally has to force himself to do, while I hate taking breaks and vacations, and wish family life didn't pull me away from working even more. Rob of course is the psychologically normal one here, and which of us you decide to take advice from is going to depend on how exactly your mind works. Ironically, in the midst of our discussion about how we get ideas, I realized that I needed to at some point write an article on my romanticize everything philosophy. This is something I have thought about before but it's been a while since I've reflected on it. Other topics we cover include:* How we describe our jobs to other people* What it was like having one foot out the door of academia* How we both sort of stumbled into our current positions* The odds of actually making money at this* How to build an audience* The ways in which we use X* Internet fame as a way for single young men to find girlfriends* Avoiding audience capture* Why we were both lucky to start our newsletters around the time that we did, rather than a few years later* Dealing with book publishers and the prestige media* Why journalists, academics, and independent writers all tend to share similar characteristics* The ways in which various writers like Razib Khan, Scott Alexander, Freddie deBoer, and others have been able to make it on their own, and how their different backgrounds have contributed to their successThis ended up being one of the most inspiring conversations I've had in a while. It was fascinating to hear Rob's story and invigorating to reflect on my own, and I felt a sense of overwhelming gratitude when considering just how much serendipity was needed for both of us to end up where we are.Below, you can watch the video of our discussion or read the transcript, lightly edited for clarity.

Why do some people love parties and others prefer to stay at home with a book? Why do some people worry endlessly about all the bad things that might happen, while others breeze through life with supreme confidence? Why is Stuart such a nice guy and Tom far less so?In this episode of The Studies Show, Tom and Stuart discuss personality and the personality tests that are supposed to measure it. They discuss whether it might be the Big Five or the Big Six, what measuring personality is good for, and whether “Grit” is even a thing. Not only that, but for the many, many people who are desperate to know, they both reveal their own personality test results.The Studies Show is sponsored by Works in Progress magazine. We absolutely love reading its beautifully-written, well-researched essays on science, technology, and human progress, and if you're a listener to this podcast, we're pretty sure you will, too. Take a look at the whole collection of articles—all available for free—right here.Show Notes* Free site to calculate your Big Five personality profile* Free site to calculate your Big Six (HEXACO) personality profile* Tom's Big Five personality profile:* Stuart's Big Five personality profile:* Is it the Big Five or the Big Six? An example of a paper that supports the latter option* Razib Khan's podcast interview with personality psychologist Brent Roberts* Example of a study on personality and job performance* Paper by Christopher Soto testing the replicability of personality's associations with life outcomes* Paper showing how “Grit” is really just a re-description of “Conscientiousness”* Severe critique of the Big Five by “a literal banana” (also read the comments!)* Story of the Hans Eysenck personality-and-health fraud (also see this meta-analysis of personality and health)* Meta-analysis of how personality factors change over time* Meta-analysis of interventions that can change personality factorsCreditsThe Studies Show is produced by Julian Mayers at Yada Yada Productions. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thestudiesshowpod.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.louiseperry.co.ukMy guest today is Razib Khan, the scientist, writer, co-founder of biotech company GenRAIT, and the author of the Unsupervised Learning Substack. We spoke about the politics of population genetics: everything from assortative mating and cognitive stratification, to the social and political consequences of 23AndMe.

In this episode, I brought Razib Khan, writer in population genetics and consumer genomics, back on the show to discuss the genetics of Israelis and Palestinians. Razib explains the genetic differences between various Jewish communities as well as the differences between people from the West Bank and from Gaza. We discuss which groups are most closely tied to the region, where other groups involved actually come from, and what the map would look like today if Europe had never interfered. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theradicalist.com/subscribe

https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content.   For the first time ever, parents going through IVF can use whole genome sequencing to screen their embryos for hundreds of conditions. Harness the power of genetics to keep your family safe, with Orchid. Check them out at orchidhealth.com. Related: The Indian caste system: origin, impact and future, The character of caste and Passing the civilizational purity test: India's 3000-year caste straitjacket. Unsupervised Learning tends to steer clear of topics “ripped from the headlines,” but the occasional exception must be made. Today, Razib talks about the intersection of religion, caste and American law and policy with Sundar Iyer and Sudha Jagannathan. Jagannathan, an MBA, is now a board member of the Coalition of Hindus of North America, after working in technology and sales in the Bay Area for 30 years. Iyer is a technology entrepreneur, advisor and angel investor, who holds a Ph.D. in computer science. But this conversation is not about technology. It's about a “current event” that took over Iyer's life for the better part of the past three years. In the year 2020, California regulators sued Cisco Systems for “for internally enforcing the caste hierarchy.” Iyer was one of two individuals named in that case. For most of the 2020's so far, Iyer's life was turned upside down, before the California Civil Rights Department dismissed its case against him (though it continues to pursue Cisco). When the this issue first emerged in the news, some blogs, group chats and email lists surfaced points that should have made anyone skeptical that Iyer was a casteist: he is an atheist who does not identify as Hindu, and his personal views on social issues are quite liberal. These facts are in the public record because twenty years ago, long before he was in the public eye, Iyer wrote about his perspectives in a blog post expressing his strident atheism and rejection of caste. Now Iyer is speaking out about what he experienced, and how progressive cultural and political institutions are being weaponized by activists pursuing narrow, self-interested aims. As a successful entrepreneur, Iyer has the resources to fight to clear his name, and stand up for the objective truth against what he sees as the manipulations of the media and activists. Jagannathan also offers her own perspective as a devout Hindu who is from a “lower caste” background who takes issue with comments made in the mainstream media about her religion and culture, where the caste system is conflated with Hinduism and Indian identity, and assertions are made that the caste is a fundamental part of her faith. Though this episode focuses on the institution of caste and the experience of Indian Americans specifically, it is more broadly about the significant tradeoffs of embracing simple solutions in a complex world. The social justice movement and the American elite political class are fundamentally egalitarian, currently ever alert for oppressors and the oppressed. In the process, innocent individuals get swept up in witch hunts, as activists attempt to find causes worthy of their attention and outrage. Iyer's experience is not unique, insofar as many, many, Americans have fallen under the narrowed eye of crusading Human Resources departments, bent on transforming workplace disputes into socio-political dramas. The ultimate question is whether an exceedingly diverse America can proceed forward as a dynamic economy and culture despite the burden of ever-present litigation and workplace conflict created when our elites fixate on what divides us, rather than what unites us.

https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. Today Razib talks to Inez Stepman, a senior policy analyst at the Independent Women's Forum, a Lincoln Fellow with the Claremont Institute and a senior contributor to The Federalist. Stepman also hosts two podcasts, High Noon and Clown Car. She and Razib first discuss the current distress, both economic and cultural, in higher education as several decades of bloat, inflation-beating cost increases and political radicalism run up against their natural limits. Stepman's recent policy report, Taxing Universities, tackles the massive fiscal bill that the American people will face in the next generation as bad loans backed by the federal government finally come due. Razib admits that as a member of “Generation X” he was unaware of the massive change in educational debt since the public sector took over almost all lending after the 2008 financial crisis. A graphic that illustrates the impending crisis comes from The New York Times:   The takeaway is that student loans originated from 2009 onward exhibit a pattern where Latinos, blacks, and nearly half of women, owe more now in 2023 than when they began payments after graduation. Stepman discusses the broader reasons for this dynamic, the expansion of higher education, the rise of credentialing in lower-paying “pink collar” jobs that saddle people with debt they can't service and an evidence-free elite consensus that more education results in more value and skills. In contrast to the current orthodoxy, Razib argues that the bachelor's degree is often simply a signaler of intelligence and conscientiousness, and the expansion of this diploma to nearly half the youngest age cohort has diluted its utility. In the second half of the podcast, Razib probes Stepman on how she arrived at a relatively conservative cultural stance despite being a secular native of Palo Alto, California, and a current resident of Manhattan. Stepman's starting point is that males and females are fundamentally different because of our biology, and we must organize human societies around this fact, rather than attempting to ignore this reality while striving for an egalitarian utopia. Stepman calls herself an anti-feminist because she believes that this denial of human nature goes back to the beginning of the movement, with the publication of Mary Wollstonecraft's The Vindication of the Rights of Women in 1792.

https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib talks to Dr. Cory J. Clark, a behavioral scientist and executive director of the Adversarial Collaboration Project at the University of Pennsylvania. Clark got her Ph.D. in social psychology at UC Irvine, but her interests have broadened over her career as is clear in a diverse oeuvre. First, Razib and Clark talk about the culture of self-censorship within science due to politicization and intra-scientific politics. They discuss whether fraud is more damaging to the career of a senior or junior scientist, and the crisis coming for behavioral economics in the wake of the Francesco Gino and Dan Ariely ethics scandals. While Razib offers the prescription of viewpoint diversity, Clark argues that a recommitment to objectivity and truth as the fundamental values of science is needed. They then move on to her major current project on “adversarial collaboration.” Whereas in “normal science” two rival research groups may hold to conflicting hypotheses for decades, with outsiders unable to adjudicate, Clark argues that researchers with differing views should come together to converge upon the truth. Her interest in the culture of science leads naturally to a broader concern about human cultural equilibria. In The Evolution of Relentless Badassery, Clark argues that a particular personality type is socially and evolutionarily favored. Razib and Clark discuss whether we live in a time of peace so that disagreeable violent characters are at a low ebb in their stature, and perhaps in the face of cultural chaos the “badass,” figures like Michael Corleone in The Godfather films may reemerge to establish order and ruthless justice. The discussion loops back to a consideration of the values that unite scientists, and the cultural and political winds moving through the profession that might threaten to blow it off course as an enterprise, might leave it more a social club than a venerable institution to generate information. Clark is candid that she is not sure she would recommend heterodox students even attempt to join the academy.

The Origins of the Khazars | DNA - Geneticist Razib Khan YouTube: Study of antiquity and the middle ages

https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib talks to Nicola Buskirk of Elessar Books (see her Substack). A 2022 graduate of Stanford University, Buskirk has already had positions at Substack (she was behind the At Length series), Thiel Foundation, Hoover Institution and now, Protocol Labs. At Elessar she is “putting long out-of-print books back into print so that they may be easily read and studied by a new generation of readers.”  Before asking about her new project, Razib asks her about Elessar, an alternative name for the character known as Aragorn. They discuss why J. R. R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings series, written in the first half of the 20th century, appeals to young people born in the 21st century. Buskirk believes that much of the attraction is in Tolkien's depiction of good and evil in a manner that edifies and educates but with subtlety and complexity. They discuss the differences between Tolkien's fantasy writing style, and that of his colleague and friend C. S. Lewis, whose Narnia series was far more nakedly allegorical than The Lord of the Rings . Razib and Buskirk also discuss whether Tolkien's work was fundamentally Roman Catholic, as the author claimed, or whether its purview is broader, explaining its lasting appeal. They also touch upon the relationship of the films to the books, and how Peter Jackson pulled off the sort of adaption that Amazon failed at. Then the conversation shifts to why Buskirk began Elessar Books, the resurfacing of knowledge and wisdom for a generation weaned on smartphones and addicted to TikTok. She talks about conversations with peers where they were amazed by her insights, even though she freely admitted to them that she simply stood on the shoulders of the ancients, whose ideas are freely available in older books. Razib and Buskirk discuss if what Antonio Garcia Martinez calls the age of orality is a reversion to preliterate and frankly more primitive modalities of thought, and her attempt to resurrect, maintain and perpetuate a culture of deep literacy among her technology-addicted generation.

https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. On this week's episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib talks to Hannah Frankman about the past, present and future of education. Frankman is a Hazlitt Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education, the founder of Rebel Educator, and the host of an eponymous podcast (Spotify, Apple and YouTube). Education as a discipline has been a human concern since Plato outlined an idealized system of universal pedagogy in The Republic, later to be rejected by his pupil Aristotle's lost treatise On Education in favor of a more targeted and elitist system.  In the American context, the field has been riven by tensions between the bottom-up forces that encouraged a well-informed citizenry, resulting in New England being the world's first universally literate society, and top-down political forces that led to the growth of secular and universal public education in the 19th century. Beginning in March 2020 the world of education came into our living rooms as the COVID-19 pandemic sent students out of the classroom into the alternative universe of “zoom school,” bringing parents face to-face with the day-to-day of the current educational framework. For many Americans, the chaos and trials of the pandemic years have them reconsidering schools and entertaining alternatives to the current system, which seemed so unprepared for the exigencies of the present. Frankman believes her non-traditional background equips her to understand the challenges of our current era, first being homeschooled, and then going straight into the workforce with Praxis, a college alternative that fosters skills that enable entrepreneurship in young people. She explains exactly what homeschooling in the American context means, from those motivated by religious concerns who mimic much of the curriculum of traditional institutions and simply modify or supplement it with Christian materials, all the way to “unschooling,” whereby students are much more self-guided and undirected. Frankman also recounts her own personal experiences with nontraditional education, the pitfalls and benefits, and why she left the traditional path when she was just six years old. They then discuss the reality that the last few years have seen crashing test scores across the countries and a widespread realization that aspects of the traditional system that might have been well geared toward producing factory workers in the 20th century may be ill-suited to the “information economy” of the 21st century. Frankman makes the case for a diversity and pluralism of responses, and she and Razib talk about various paths that other nations have taken, including the more structured systems of East Asia. Finally, they discuss the future of Rebel Educator, and her vision for a future of American education focused on choice, experimentation and flexibility better suited to our current learning options and the needs of a modern economy.

https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. Today Razib talks to Lyman Stone, a demographer and Ph.D. candidate at McGill University, about the fall, rise and fall of religion in America. In 2020, Stone published a report, Promise and Peril: The History of American Religiosity and Its Recent Decline, where he outlined the demographic and religious history of the US, and its possible future. They first cover the historical context of American religion in the 18th century, reviewing the elite rise in secularism, the radicalism of the founding's Disestablishmentarianism and the early 19th-century legislation against the mixing of church and state. Alexis de Tocqueville observed in the early 1800's that the US combined religious pluralism on a social scale, high levels of personal piety and governmental secularism. This was a sharp break from European traditions, and Stone addresses the thesis whether this explains why America still remains much more religious in terms of observance than nations like England and Germany. But despite America's comparative religiosity, it has become much more secular in the last generation. Razib talks to Stone about the rise of the religious “nones” across the  Western world, and the decline of social conservatives within the Republican party. Stone points out that for most, religious identity and level of practice are established during the teen years, with religious education (or lack thereof) being the biggest predictor of religious adherence (or lack thereof). The relative secularism of Zoomers and Millennials, Americans born after 1980, presages a much less Christian America as the 21st century's first half progresses. But Stone argues that this is not necessarily the final state of American religiosity; secular America in 1800 underwent the Second Great Awakening, which led to a much more evangelical nation by 1900. Rather than a linear progress toward an end state, religious history seems cyclical.

Razib Khan is a geneticist, host of the Unsupervised Learning podcast, and writer of an excellent newsletter. Find Razib:https://twitter.com/razibkhanMentioned in the episode:https://thenetworkstate.com/microhistory-and-macrohistoryhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Son_Also_Rises_(book)Timestamps:0:00 Anons14:00 Genetic Crimes57:00 Genomic Models1:12:00 Strauss This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.fromthenew.world/subscribe

https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. In the fall of 2022  Liz Truss was the UK's Prime Minister for 44 days. Her tenure was cut short by turmoil in the financial markets, as her attempts to roll out policies similar to the US's 1980's program of “Reaganomics” that combined lower taxes and higher deficits triggered panic and an intervention from the Bank of England. In retrospect, the problem was that the British elite periodically forgets that it's the not US, it's not the largest economy in the world and the pound sterling is not the world's reserve currency. The US, unlike any other nation, can print money to escape its fiscal straijackets.  History hangs over Britain, and the shadows of the past always impinge upon the present. The UK still sees itself as an imperial nation, but today India has a larger economy than its one-time colonizer. The idea of the British Empire persisted deep into the 20th century, but the US was already the larger economy by the end of the 19th century. With World War I, the UK became a debtor to the US, and the power dynamic of the “special relationship” inverted as the mother country became the junior partner. Today Razib talks to Samuel Mcilhagga about Britain's contemporary status as a post-imperial nation-state caught in economic stagnancy. They discuss his piece in Palladium, Britain Is Dead, which is a reflection of the structural and human realities of a fallen empire. Razib and Mcilhagga address the recent divergence between the UK and US from a point of rough parity in 2008, at the peak influence of high finance in developed economies, which placed the City of London in an advantageous position. Economic stagnation and high inflation have afflicted the UK since the great recession, and Britain has lagged niy only the US but fallen behind its continental peers, France and Germany. Mcilhagga attributed some of this to the British elite's inability to move beyond their role as imperial administrators and rentiers; he contrasts the productive and economically innovative American oligarchs to the complacent British upper class. Razib wonders about the strangeness of the difference between the two societies given their shared history, language and culture. Mcilhagga paints a picture of a small and prosperous professional class that benefited from globalization, and a broader populace that has been slowly ground into immiseration over the last two generations.

https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib hosts three guests, Sarah Haider of A Special Place in Hell (and her own Substack), Shadi Hamid of the Brookings Institute (and Wisdom of the Crowds and his own Substack) and Murtaza Hussain of The Intercept (and his own Substack), for the second episode of the “Intellectual Brown Web” (here's episode #1). Razib, Haider, Hamid and Hussain discuss the recent clashes between Muslim Americans and the LBTQIA+ movement. Was it inevitable? Was the “War on Terror” simply a two-decade interregnum interrupting the alignment of Muslims with social conservatives? And what is the place of Muslim intellectuals and politicians in the progressive movement going forward? Haider has written about how the Muslim-progressive alliance in American politics will unravel, and in this episode, she defends the contention that it naturally falls out of the theological propositions embedded within Islam. Hamid and Hussain in contrast argue that though the tensions are real, there is a possibility of a pluralistic solution, preserving fidelity to Islamic beliefs. All agree that the main issue is the challenge that progressive reworking of gender identity poses to traditional norms and traditional religion and that the Muslim immigrants in places like Hamtramck speak for many Americans in their confusion and sublimated hostility to the changes that they see in American society around them. Related: ‘A sense of betrayal': liberal dismay as Muslim-led US city bans Pride flags, American Muslims are increasingly ready to find common ground with conservatives against the radical Left and CAIR demands apology from Montgomery County councilwoman over 'offensive' remarks.

In this podcast, Kushal speaks with Razib Khan on how affirmative action as a policy affects brown people in America. They discuss issues like inherited advantage and Razib shares his views on why the Supreme Court did the right thing by ruling in favour of the Students for Fair Admissions. Follow Razib: Twitter: @razibkhan Substack: https://razib.substack.com/ #AffirmativeAction #Quotas #BrownAmerica ------------------------------------------------------------ Listen to the podcasts on: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/kushal-mehra-99891819 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1rVcDV3upgVurMVW1wwoBp Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-c%C4%81rv%C4%81ka-podcast/id1445348369 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-carvaka-podcast ------------------------------------------------------------ Support The Cārvāka Podcast: Become a Member on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKPx... Become a Member on Fanmo: https://fanmo.in/the_carvaka_podcast Become a Member on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/carvaka UPI: kushalmehra@icici To buy The Carvaka Podcast Exclusive Merch please visit: http://kushalmehra.com/shop ------------------------------------------------------------ Follow Kushal: Twitter: https://twitter.com/kushal_mehra?ref_... Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KushalMehraO... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thecarvakap... Koo: https://www.kooapp.com/profile/kushal... Inquiries: https://kushalmehra.com/ Feedback: kushalmehra81@gmail.com

Evidence is growing that China is experimenting with genetic manipulation to create super soldiers, human-animal hybrids, bioweapons, and other horrors. But are the Chinese using genetic information from the millions of Americans who have handed over their DNA to corporations like 23andMe and AncestryDNA to fuel their disturbing experiments? James Poulos is joined by geneticist and thought leader Razib Khan to discuss the shocking developments in genetic research, the woke ideological capture of America's research institutions, whether obesity is feminizing men and contributing to the current gender madness, and much more.

My guest today is Razib Khan. Razib is a population geneticist, writer, and entrepreneur. He is a prominent voice in the realm of genetic genealogy, where he illuminates the interplay of genes, history, and culture. His writing has been featured in the New York Times, India Today, the National Review, and his scholarly work is cited in many scientific journals. Razib also has a very interesting Substack called "Unsupervised Learning".In this episode, we talk about commercial genetic testing companies like 23andMe. We talk about the genetic histories of regions like Russia, China, Ashkenazis and Madagasy. We also talk about the Indo-Aryan connection. We talk about whether race is a social construct. We discuss the concept of epigenetics and so-called inherited trauma. We talk about what Cleopatra really looked like and more. I hope you all enjoyed this conversation as much as I did.

My guest today is Razib Khan. Razib is a population geneticist, writer, and entrepreneur. He is a prominent voice in the realm of genetic genealogy, where he illuminates the interplay of genes, history, and culture. His writing has been featured in the New York Times, India Today, the National Review, and his scholarly work is cited in many scientific journals. Razib also has a very interesting Substack called "Unsupervised Learning". In this episode, we talk about commercial genetic testing companies like 23andMe. We talk about the genetic histories of regions like Russia, China, Ashkenazis and Madagasy. We also talk about the Indo-Aryan connection. We talk about whether race is a social construct. We discuss the concept of epigenetics and so-called inherited trauma. We talk about what Cleopatra really looked like and more. I hope you all enjoyed this conversation as much as I did. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

My guest today is Razib Khan. Razib is a population geneticist, writer, and entrepreneur. He is a prominent voice in the realm of genetic genealogy, where he illuminates the interplay of genes, history, and culture. His writing has been featured in the New York Times, India Today, the National Review, and his scholarly work is cited in many scientific journals. Razib also has a very interesting Substack called "Unsupervised Learning".In this episode, we talk about commercial genetic testing companies like 23andMe. We talk about the genetic histories of regions like Russia, China, Ashkenazis and Madagasy. We also talk about the Indo-Aryan connection. We talk about whether race is a social construct. We discuss the concept of epigenetics and so-called inherited trauma. We talk about what Cleopatra really looked like and more. I hope you all enjoyed this conversation as much as I did.

On this episode of the Unsupervised Learning podcast, Razib talks to Peter Nimitz, the author behind the Nemets Substack, which explores topics as diverse as the 2014 Donbass War and the likelihood of Eurasian migration into Chad thousands of years ago. Razib and Nimitz walk through his recent post, the Seven Ages of Western Eurasia: A brief outline of the 11,700 years from the Anatolian Farmers to the Present. In the piece, he explores the changes that Europe and West Asia have undergone since the end of the last Ice Age, including the rise and fall of pre-literate civilizations before written history, and the recurrent social and economic collapses from which humans have had to rebuild. Razib and Nimitz have similar interests, but where Razib focuses more on genetic relationships, Nimitz tends to dive deep into archaeology, supplementing his understanding of the migration of peoples with paleogenetics. They also discuss the proto-civilizations of the Ice Age, including nascent farming communities that might date to over 20,000 years ago. The conversation repeatedly circles back to the theme that paleogenetics has had a transformative effect on interpreting archaeological sites and our understanding of the migrations of past peoples. https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content.

Geneticist, writer and CXO of Generate Razib Khan stops by the pod to talk genes and more.

We're still here! Thanks for your patience as we get things in place for the new season. In this episode, our last audio-only episode before we sell give away our souls to YouTube, problematic geneticist Razib Khan joins the ladies to talk about all the stuff you're not supposed to talk about when it comes to human DNA. Topics include Hindu nationalism, Arab social control, and how tall Sarah's husband needs to be if any of her boys have a prayer of not being undateable manlets. Even though Meghan is taller than Sarah, much of the discussion goes over her head. This is underscored by one particularly embarrassing moment, which Meghan, because she's Authentic AF, did not insist on editing out. #YoureWelcome. In the BONUS content for paying subscribers only: We backbite about Razib. Note: This episode was recorded awhile ago. More recently, Sarah was on Razib's podcast talking about the “intellectual brown web” (whaaat??) which you can hear here but only after you listen to this one. To learn more about Razib, visit https://www.razib.com/bio/wordpress/. Coming soon: New YouTube Channel: A Special Place In Hell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This monologue is incomplete, for the complete monologue, checkout: Razib Khan's Unsupervised Learning Podcast Substack Why does human skin color vary so much? And what is the relationship between hair color, eye color and overall pigmentation? What genes control pigmentation in humans and other animals? Razib addresses all these questions in this episode of Unsupervised Learning, as he discusses the genetic basis and evolutionary origins of variation on this trait that has held such importance in our natural, social and cultural history. He notes that today we understand the genetic basis of pigmentation in terms of what variants control skin, hair and eye colors and how they relate to other traits, as well as their evolutionary trajectory over the past 100,000 years. Forensic pigmentation prediction tools in Europeans in particular are now excellent. But Razib notes that it remains a mystery exactly how natural and sexual selection relate to variation in human pigmentation. In Descent of Man, Charles Darwin proposed that racial differences were driven by sexual selection, and this framework has been picked up by later scholars and often emerges as an almost deus ex machina when it comes to explaining variation in pigmentation. The tempting explanation of Vitamin-D synthesis at high latitudes suffers from the reality that light skin has evolved recently in much of Europe, and many northern peoples like the Inuit remain comparatively dark.

https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. In April of 2021, this Substack published a piece, The ultimate price of costless gestures, that anticipated a spate of articles in the second half of the year in the mainstream media reporting on the rise of murders in 2020. Compare the figure from the Substack piece with one in The New York Times published in November of 2021:   The similarity is simply a function of the fact that the graphs draw upon the same underlying data, aggregated reports by the FBI from local police departments. This underscores that the data is out there if people choose to analyze and talk about it, something that did not occur for much of 2020. Today on the Unsupervised Learning podcast, Razib talks to Charles Fain Lehman, a fellow at The Manhattan Institute who works on the Policing and Public Safety initiative and is also a contributing editor of City Journal (here are two articles Razib has contributed to the publication). Lehman, who has a background in data analysis and was previously a writer for The Washington Free Beacon, where he wrote Why Can't We Talk About the Murder Wave? In contrast to many journalists and analysts, he does not fear talking about crime, and he and Razib discuss the magnitude of the current murder spike (modest) and its possible abatement and the strange decoupling of homicide rates from other forms of violent crime. Lehman also explains that localities over the last few years have begun to hold back their traditional data reporting from the FBI, making more recent analyses very difficult. Razib also reflects on his memories of the late 20th-century crime wave that peaked in 1990, four years before Lehman was born.

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks to Bryan Caplan about Caplan's new book, Don't Be a Feminist: Essays on Genuine Justice. Despite what the narrow purview  the title might suggest, Don't Be a Feminist is a wide-ranging book that contains essays on IQ, immigration and identity politics, among other things (in addition, yes, to women's rights). Caplan is the editor and chief writer for Bet On It, the blog hosted by the Salem Center for Policy at the University of Texas, and a professor of economics at George Mason. His previous books were The Myth of the Rational Voter,  Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, The Case Against Education, Open Borders, Labor Econ Versus the World, and How Evil Are Politicians? Razib and Caplan also discuss his colleague Garrett Jones' new book The Culture Transplant: How Migrants Make the Economies They Move To a Lot Like the Ones They Left, the case for open borders, the cultural tenor of academia and its future prospects https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content.  

https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack, https://razib.substack.com, and original video content. What does it mean to be Eurocentric? What does it mean to be a white supremacist? What does the term ”the West” mean, and how is it different from simply the geographical designation Europe? On this episode of the Unsupervised Learning podcast, Razib discusses the cultural and genetic origins of Europeans, how they have been viewed over the last few thousand years and how they have viewed themselves. Starting around 3000 BC, when the first Yamnaya men were expanding out of the Pontic steppe and assimilating the Neolithic Globular Amphora culture of eastern Poland, and going down to the 20th century when the nations of the world were cleaved between those aligned with the Soviet Union versus those aligned with the USA, Razib addresses when conceptions of European, Western and white self-identity could have emerged, and indeed did emerge. Were the Classical Greeks white supremacists? Did the Spaniards impose European hegemony on the New World? And when did the West outpace the rest?

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib discusses the new book, The Culture Transplant: How Migrants Make the Economies They Move To a Lot Like the Ones They Left, with author Garett Jones. Jones is a professor of economics at George Mason University, and The Culture Transplant is the third book in what he likes of think of as his “Singapore trilogy,” beginning with Hive Mind: How Your Nation's IQ Matters So Much More Than Your Own, and then moving to 10% Less Democracy: Why You Should Trust Elites a Little More and the Masses a Little Less. Jones explains how cultural assimilation and acculturation is actually not nearly as powerful as we might think and that ancestral folkways and norms persist for centuries, transforming nations like the US and Argentina over time as migration streams alter their demographic makeup. He argues that this is important because some nations are highly productive and innovative, and their cultural frameworks are necessary to foster their economic role in the global system. The Culture Transplant takes a contrarian position, going against the stance of mainstream economics, whereby every individual is an interchangeable “homo economicus.” https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack, https://razib.substack.com, and original video content.

On this episode of the Unsupervised Learning podcast, Razib discusses the history and genetics of Anatolia, from the first farmers to the Ottoman conquest of the peninsula. He focuses on the underappreciated reality that prehistoric Anatolia was the font of the first wave of farmers that built the majestic Neolithic societies of Europe, from arid Iberia north to the shores of the Baltic. These people left the vast stoneworks that dot Europe's Atlantic coasts to this day, beginning with the megaliths of Brittany and culminating in the enigmatic site of Stonehenge. Razib also points out the role of Anatolia in the emergence of historical states, like the nearly forgotten ancient empire of the Hittites, plus the storied Byzantines, who held the armies of Islam at bay for nearly 1,000 years. Finally, he addresses the ethnogenesis of the Turkish-speaking population in Anatolia and its transformation from the eastern frontier of Greek speech to the western edge of the Turkic world.

Michael Malice (“YOUR WELCOME”) is joined by writer and well-known geneticist, Razib Khan, to talk about the stigma of eugenics, the unpredictability of biohacking, and the concerningly rapid changes in the studies of sex and genetics. Razib also gives us an insight into the genetically superior sex, and why some of us are coded to not live as long as others. razib.substack.com twitter.com/razibkhan Order THE ANARCHIST HANDBOOK: https://www.amzn.com/B095DVF8FJ Order THE NEW RIGHT: https://amzn.to/2IFFCCu Order DEAR READER: https://t.co/vZfTVkK6qf?amp=1 https://twitter.com/michaelmalice https://instagram.com/michaelmalice https://malice.locals.com https://youtube.com/michaelmaliceofficial Intro song: "Out of Reach" by Legendary House Cats https://thelegendaryhousecats.bandcamp.com/ The newest episode of "YOUR WELCOME" releases on iTunes and YouTube every Thursday! Please subscribe and leave a review. This week's sponsors: Miracle Brand Sheets: trymiracle.com/MALICE Patriot Gold Group: Call 888-505-9845 and mention “Michael Malice” Progressive: progressive.com Sheath Underwear: sheathunderwear.com, promo code: MALICE

Nick talks to genetics researcher & writer Razib Khan. Razib did graduate work in genetics at the University of California-Davis and recently founded a genomics data startup. He also runs a Substack, "Unsupervised Learning," where he writes a lot of fascinating articles on the subjects of human evolutionary & population genetics, personal genomics, and more. Nick and Razib discussed: how the story of human evolution has changed over the past two decades; genomics technology & ancient DNA; Neanderthals, Denisovans & ancient humans; personal genomics (e.g. 23AndMe, Ancestry.com); Razib's experience as a writer on Substack.SUPPORT M&M:Sign up for the free weekly Mind & Matter newsletter:[https://mindandmatter.substack.com/?sort=top]Learn how you can further support the podcast: [https://mindandmatter.substack.com/p/how-to-support-mind-and-matter]Learn more about our podcast sponsor, Dosist[https://dosist.com]ABOUT Nick Jikomes:Nick is a neuroscientist and podcast host. He is currently Director of Science & Innovation at Leafly, a technology startup in the legal cannabis industry. He received a Ph.D. in Neuroscience from Harvard University and a B.S. in Genetics from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.Support the show

In this podcast, Kushal speaks with Razib Khan and Colin Wright as they discuss the current state of affairs in the American Culture Wars. Is America now Wokeistan? How is this new ideology impacting American society and what sort of intellectual untouchability is being practiced? Follow Them: Twitter: @razibkhan Twitter: @SwipeWright Substack: razib.substack.com Substack: realityslaststand.com #Wokeism #GenderWars --------------------------------------------- Listen to the podcasts on: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/kushal-mehra-99891819 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1rVcDV3upgVurMVW1wwoBp Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-c%C4%81rv%C4%81ka-podcast/id1445348369 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-carvaka-podcast ------------------------------------------------------------ Support The Cārvāka Podcast: Become a Member on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKPxuul6zSLAfKSsm123Vww/join Become a Member on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/carvaka UPI: kushalmehra@icici To buy The Carvaka Podcast Exclusive Merch please visit: http://kushalmehra.com/shop ------------------------------------------------------------ Follow Kushal: Twitter: https://twitter.com/kushal_mehra?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KushalMehraOfficial/? Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thecarvakapodcast/?hl=en Koo: https://www.kooapp.com/profile/kushal_mehra Inquiries: https://kushalmehra.com/ Feedback: kushalmehra81@gmail.com

Three blockbuster papers on ancient DNA just landed in Science Magazine: The genetic history of the Southern Arc: A bridge between West Asia and Europe, A genetic probe into the ancient and medieval history of Southern Europe and West Asia, and, Ancient DNA from Mesopotamia suggests distinct Pre-Pottery and Pottery Neolithic migrations into Anatolia (ungated copies available at the Reich lab website). Why three papers in one issue of Science? The authors claim there was too much data to pack into one publication, which feels right to me. So what do these publications mean for human history and human evolution? Do we now know where the Indo-Europeans were originally from? Were the ancient Classical Greeks blonde? How did farming emerge in Anatolia? What is the relationship of Armenians to other Indo-European-speaking people? These papers tackle a staggering number of questions. On this episode of the Unsupervised Learning podcast, Razib weighs in and guides us through what the papers mean for our understanding of human genetics and population history and where we go from here. This monologue complements the August 2022 episode where he surveys the great ancient human DNA Diasporas.  

This week takes The Unsupervised Learning podcast in a somewhat different direction. In response to a common listener request, Razib takes on his first “one-man-show,” digging into his stores of knowledge of the population genetics of ancient peoples and tribes, delving into the significance of abstrusely labeled clusters like “Ancient North Eurasian” (ANE) over 60 minutes. But as anyone following this substack will anticipate, first a caveat: in these heady days of endless ancient DNA discoveries and attendant revisions to long-standing convention: everything is provisional. Razib notes that his assertions are not written in stone, as new work from researchers like Laurent Excoffier adds fresh nuance and intriguing detail to the broader evolutionary picture every few months. This podcast takes a geographical approach, surveying Eurasian, African, Oceanian and New World populations over the last 20,000 years since the Last Glacial Maximum. Razib covers not just how populations interrelate and how they emerged, but he also touches on unique aspects of physical appearance, adaptations and natural history. Reading:   Spanish hunter-gatherer had blue eyes and dark skin Cheddar Man: Mesolithic Britain's blue-eyed boy Population genomics of Mesolithic Scandinavia: Investigating early postglacial migration routes and high-latitude adaptation Ancient human genome-wide data from a 3000-year interval in the Caucasus corresponds with eco-geographic regions The Formation of Human Populations in South and Central Asia Massive migration from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for present-day Europeans Mysterious East Asians vanished during the ice age. This group replaced them Earliest Americans Arrived in Waves, DNA Study Finds Genomic insights into the origin of farming in the ancient Near East Divided by DNA: The uneasy relationship between archaeology and ancient genomics Ancient DNA and deep population structure in sub-Saharan African foragers Ancient Admixture in Human History

Charles listens as professors and scientists Razib Khan, Tade Souaiaia, and Wilfred Reilly discuss race. Is it real? If not, why are so many people consumed by it. If it is real, how important is it and should it be a priority, culturally, politically, and medically.Shemeka vacations.Support the show

Jennifer Senior was a long-time staff writer at New York magazine and a daily book critic for the NYT. Her own book is the bestseller, All Joy and No Fun: The Paradox of Modern Parenthood. She’s now a staff writer at The Atlantic, where she won the 2022 Pulitzer for “What Bobby McIlvaine Left Behind,” a story about 9/11. But in this episode we primarily focus on her essay, “It’s Your Friends Who Break Your Heart.”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 our convo — on why friends with different politics are increasingly rare, on how Jesus died for his friends — pop over to our YouTube page. A new transcript is up in honor of what we are still learning about Trump’s attempted violent coup: Bob Woodward and Robert Costa on the perpetual peril of Trump. Below is a segment of that convo — probably the most significant one we’ve had on the Dishcast yet:Turning to the debate over abortion in the ashes of Roe, a reader dissents:I’m having a hard time understanding why you’re so misleading about abortion rights in the US compared to other nations, and naive about protection of the other rights under the 14th Amendment. Germany allows abortions up to 12 weeks for any reason, but what’s remarkable about Germany is not the 12-week mark, but that Germany offers pre-natal care, child care, employment guarantees, etc. that make it much easier for a woman if she chooses to go through with her pregnancy. The US doesn’t have anything like this. And even with the new right in America pretending to hop on board the social insurance train, passing any laws in a conservative-majority Congress that would provide more social services to pregnant women would deliberately NOT address or protect the right of a woman to control her own fertility — that is, to decide to have a child or not. In other words, the interests of a woman’s bodily autonomy and reproductive control would be denied. That makes women, on the whole, unable to live freely in society. But we don’t have to hop over to Europe to run a comparison. Canada protects abortion rights for any reason, with most clinics providing the procedure up to 23 weeks. This aligns with the (previous) fetal viability cutoff that Roe protected. And recently Mexico decriminalized abortion entirely, which paves the way for full, legal abortion rights.The US is now the regressive anomaly, not the progressive outlier you insist we are. And your idea that abortion can just be decided via democracy is cute — maybe that would’ve been true in the past — but SCOTUS could care less about the legislative process. You only have to look at their recent gun decision to realize that. You should make these things clear when you discuss abortion, instead of conveniently obfuscating the context and facts.As far as your confidence that the other rights under the 14th Amendment — gay marriage, access to contraception, etc. — will stand firm, I’m not sure why. Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney-Barrett evoked stare decisis in their confirmation hearings, and this turned out to be a shameless lie from all of them. With the conservative majority in place, they could then take up the Dobbs case and use it to overturn Roe entirely — stare decisis be damned.Alito left the door open to address Obergefell, etc. in his draft opinion, so why would you think Thomas taking it a step further is just him “trolling”? The majority of Americans wanted Roe left in place; its provisions were the compromise that balanced the interests of the woman with that of the fetus that you incorrectly thought was lacking. (Listen to Ezra Klein’s podcast with court expert Dahlia Lithwick to understand why that is). Yet despite its popularity, Roe was struck down. The majority of Americans support gay marriage. But the conservative court has publicly stated now that they don't care about what Americans want or think. Alito and Thomas have clearly said what they're willing to go after next. Kavanaugh playing footsie with the idea that those other rights are safe is just another lie that you are too willing to fall for, as I was too willing to think they wouldn't, in the end, touch Roe.As far as healthcare access in Germany, Katie Herzog made that point during our “Real Time” appearance last Friday:From a “Real Time” watcher:I disagree with you on quite a few issues, but appreciated your level-headed commentary on Bill Maher’s show. You’re one of the only people I saw today who forcefully made the point that the SCOTUS decision still allows for action by Congress — it’s a crucial point that has been totally lost in this discussion.From another fan of Bill’s show:I appreciated your take pointing out that the US is the only country that has made abortion rights a constitutional right, and I do understand your argument that this is something that needs to be decided through the democratic process. But I’m wondering if perhaps, on a deeper level, you’re shooting yourself in the foot. Your attitude has been for a long time that America is unique, exceptional, in its supposed commitment to individual freedom, as reflected in its constitution. Doesn’t that imply that enshrining personal rights in its constitution is in fact a perfect evocation to our country’s exceptionalism, what sets it apart from the cynical bickering and proceduralism of European parliamentary systems?I believe in democracy, tempered by constitutional restraints. So the kind of judicial supremacy you seem to be advocating seems outside that. I repeat that I would not have repealed Roe, for stare decisis and social stability reasons. But for the same reason, I wouldn’t have voted for it in 1973. 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.Many more dissents, and other reader comments on abortion, here. That roundup addressed the concern over stare decisis that readers keep bringing up. As I wrote then:Yes, I worry about stare decisis — but it is not an absolute bar to changing precedents. Akhil Amar, the renowned constitutional scholar at Yale, rebuts the same argument. Amar also just appeared on Bari’s podcast, in an episode titled, “The Yale Law Professor Who Is Anti-Roe But Pro-Choice” — a great listen.Bari addressed the Dobbs decision in her new piece, “The Post-Roe Era Begins.” Another reader looks at the legislative route:I think President Biden and the Democrats as a whole would be in a far better position with voters today if over the past 18 months they had taken that same “small bites” approach on a variety of other issues: border security, election reform and just about any other challenge where they now have nothing to show the American voters because they approached those issues if they had significant majorities in each house. They could even take this “small bites” approach right now on the abortion issue, given (as you’ve documented) that the vast majority of Americans favor access to abortions with reasonable restrictions. Instead, Chuck Schumer runs a bill that’s even more permissive than Roe.I know it’s naïve to think we can take politics out of policymaking, but maybe, given the election hand they were dealt, it would have been good politics to pursue progress over progressivism. Right now they’d be running on a far different record (one of being the adults in the room) and could present a much stronger claim for leading our nation. Instead, they wasted a lot of time and opportunity pretending they had the clout to adopt the entire far-left progressive agenda.Another reader delves into the Court precedents that Democrats are wringing their hands over:You wrote about Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell: “Thomas also concedes that there could be other constitutional defenses for these previous decisions beyond ‘substantive due process.’”There is one defense, at least. The 14th Amendment has a due process clause and an equal protection clause. When Casey upheld Roe, the right to abortion was based upon due process, not equal protection. Dobbs found that due process did not guarantee the right to abortion. Equal protection of the laws is different. If a state allows an opposite-sex couple to marry or have sex, but bans a similarly situated same-sex couple from doing so, then equal protection of the laws is denied based upon sex, in violation of the 14th Amendment. If there were a state where females were banned from obtaining abortions but males were specifically permitted to have abortions, then that would be a denial of equal protection, based upon sex. But there is, of course, no world in which that would happen, and if there were, the state could simply ban males from having abortions as well and cure the equal-protection problem. Obergefell was based upon both due process and equal protection, so if due process is removed we still have equal protection. Lawrence was decided on due process alone, but it easily could be upheld based upon equal protection. (Justice O’Connor, in concurring in the ruling, said she would have relied upon equal protection instead of due process.) So Lawrence and Obergefell seem safe. Griswold does not seem safe under equal protection, but it may be safe under other provisions, although no state is currently seriously trying to ban the sale of contraceptives. Although Bostock was a decision based upon the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and not on the Constitution, Gorsuch ruled that the law that banned sex discrimination in employment applied to gays and transgender people. His reasoning was that if you fire a female employee for being married to a women but don’t fire a male employee for being married to a woman, then you are discriminating based upon the employee’s sex. There is a very strong argument that the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause works similarly. I broadly agree with this. Speaking of the transgender debate, a parent writes:While I generally agree with your balanced approach, I think you are still missing what is fueling the alarm on the right. As a parent of a 14 year old, I’m very aware of the extraordinary confusion that some teens now face because of the mainstream promotion of gender identities. For many kids, all this is harmless and ridiculous, and they tune it out. For a very tiny number of kids, this information may be extremely necessary, and perhaps even lifesaving, so they don’t feel so alone.  But unfortunately, I believe there is a quite significant number of kids that have come to believe that all their teen problems will be solved if they simply lop off a few body parts. A few days ago I caught up with a friend who is a wreck because her 14-year-old daughter asked if she could cut off her breasts. This girl has some issues with body anxiety and acceptance, like the majority of teen girls, and has now decided she can avoid all the bad aspects of maturing into a woman by simply becoming a man, which in her mind is closer to remaining a girl, which is what she really wants. The mother is trying to help every way she can, and is about as caring and progressive as a parent can possibly be. But you have to understand how parents today are simply helpless to combat the flood of bizarre, foolish, and/or utterly toxic information that their kids find on the internet, or in social media with their classmates. We entirely ban our 14-year-old from all social media, and from all internet sites except for those needed for school, because we have seen time and time again how kids’ lives are getting wrecked from all that sludge. Most parents are simply not equipped to handle it. Many aren’t able to police their child as thoroughly as we do, and for those on the right with kids, I believe this very real damage has caused some to turn to any platform such as QAnon or other fringe groups that can make sense of this real trauma and harm to their kids. If you don’t have kids, it’s very easy to dismiss this as hysteria. But if you are aware of what's happening to kids nowadays, it’s truly terrifying.Lisa Selin Davis would agree; her new piece on Substack is titled, “It’s a Terrifying Time to Have a Gender-Questioning Kid.” And I completely understand where the reader is coming from. I find the relentless promotion of concepts derived from critical gender and critical queer theory to be destabilizing to kids’ identities, lives and happiness. These woke fanatics are taking the real experience of less than a half percent of the population and imposing it as if it is some kind of choice for everyone else. This is called “inclusion.” It is actually “indoctrination.”Telling an impressionable gay boy he might be a girl throws a wrench into his psychological development, adding confusion, possible generating bodily mutilation. Making all of this as cool as possible — as so many teachers and schools now do — is downright disturbing. The whole idea that all children can choose their pronouns because the tiniest proportion have gender dysphoria is a form of insanity. But it’s an insanity based on critical theory whose goal is the dismantling of all norms, and deconstruction of objective reality by calling it a function of “white supremacy.” This next reader has “a theory I’ve wanted to float by you”:I’m increasingly becoming of the opinion that the modern trans/gender movement is the twisted offspring of something in the gay rights movement that we thought was a good thing but actually wasn’t: the notion that someone is “born that way.” Today, we increasingly feel the need to diagnose children who were “born a certain way” and then provide medical interventions for something that is aggressively conflating the physical and the mental. (I’m using the historical Abrahamic distinction between the two here, sure there’s a philosophical debate about whether or not this distinction exists.) And that makes perfect sense if you think that the foundation of acceptability for these immutable identities is determined at birth — we have medicine in service of zeitgeist.I think the original sin here is going with “what we could get done” in the gay rights movement and stopping before we finished the job — of letting everyone know that these are preferences, and you need to respect and love people regardless of the choices they make and not just because they “can’t help it” because they were “born that way.” If we were to do away with this biological imperative driving identity, we’d end up with what we should really be striving for: radical acceptance of personal choices, and deconstruction of gender roles and stereotypes without engaging in pseudoscience.The trouble with this argument, I think, is that it doesn’t reflect the experience of most gay people. We do not “choose” our orientation. That is the key point — whether that lack of choice is due to biology or early childhood or something else is irrelevant. And genuinely trans people do not choose to be trans either. It’s a profound disjunction between the sex they feel they are and the sex they actually are. It also may be caused by any number of things. But it is involuntary.The queer left rejects this view entirely — because, in their view, there is no underlying reality to human beings, biological or psychological. It’s all about “narratives” driven by “systems of power,” and being gay or trans is infinitely malleable. That’s why they continuously use a slur word for gays — “queer” — to deconstruct homosexuality itself, and turn it merely into one of many ways in which to dismantle liberal society. I regard the “queer left” as dangerous as the far right in its belief that involuntary homosexual orientation doesn’t exist. Lastly, a listener “would like to make a couple of suggestions for Dishcast guests”:1) Razib Khan — he has been blogging for 20 years on genetics, particularly ancient population movements (e.g. Denisovans and Yamnaya). His Unsupervised Learning is currently the second-highest-paid science substack after Scott Alexander. To give you a flavour, his post on the genetic history of Ashkenazi Jews was very popular. Khan also does culture war stuff, mostly because he is a scientist and believes in truth and science. He has subsequently been the subject of controversy, as you can see from his Wikipedia page — which isn’t really fair, but gives you a flavor. His post “Applying IQ to IQ: Selecting for smarts is important” is the kind of thing that gets him in trouble. He is my favourite public intellectual, in large part because he combines actual hardcore science information with anti-woke skepticism. And he is just generally a very smart and interesting guy. Though I’m a fan of his substack, I’d like to hear him on your podcast because I’d like to find out more about Razib as a person, how he feels about the controversies, etc.2) Claire Fox — Baroness Fox of Buckley — is a former communist turned libertarian and Brexiteer, once a member of European Parliament and now a life peer in the House of Lords. Her Twitter feed gives a pretty good idea of her interests and views. Here are some clips on cancel culture in higher education; single-sex spaces for women; and a libertarian view on smoking. She broadly belongs to the British “TERF island” of gender-critical feminists. I know you’ve had Kathleen Stock on your podcast already, but Fox’s background, libertarian views and current membership in the House of Lords make her particularly interesting.I know Razib and deeply admire him and his intellectual courage. And it’s true that, in real life, he’s a hoot, a lively conversationalist, with an amazing life story. Because of his views about the science of genetics and human populations, he is, of course, anathema to the woke left. One good reason to invite him on. Get full access to The Weekly Dish at andrewsullivan.substack.com/subscribe

In this podcast, Razib Khan talks with us about War. This podcast was an expansion of the 2 part essay Razib wrote for his substack. We chat about the human tendency to fight, where it comes from, and how it is going, the different world views when it comes to explaining the phenomenon of war. Follow Razib: Twitter: @razibkhan You can check out all of Razib's work here https://www.razib.com/bio/wordpress/ Subscribe to his substack here: https://razib.substack.com/ #War #Violence ---------------------------------------------------- Listen to the podcasts on: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/kushal-mehra-99891819 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1rVcDV3upgVurMVW1wwoBp Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-c%C4%81rv%C4%81ka-podcast/id1445348369 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-carvaka-podcast ------------------------------------------------------------ Support The Cārvāka Podcast: Become a Member on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKPxuul6zSLAfKSsm123Vww/join Become a Member on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/carvaka UPI: kushalmehra@icici To buy The Carvaka Podcast Exclusive Merch please visit: http://kushalmehra.com/shop ------------------------------------------------------------ Follow Kushal: Twitter: https://twitter.com/kushal_mehra?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KushalMehraOfficial/? Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thecarvakapodcast/?hl=en Koo: https://www.kooapp.com/profile/kushal_mehra Inquiries: https://kushalmehra.com/ Feedback: kushalmehra81@gmail.com

The Russian invasion of Ukraine feels a bit like something out of another century. It’s not just that it’s a land war in Europe, reminiscent of the mechanized industrial era. It’s that Russia’s casus belli is the opposite of strategic; Putin’s war aims seem mythical and weirdly ancient. Beneath the proximate causes, such as NATO expansion (if you’re even willing to believe that’s anything more than an excuse), lies a vision of Russia as a fallen and now resurgent imperial power, and Ukraine as a vassal state gone rogue. And the split identity of Russia as both an eastern outpost of modern Western civilization and a kind of Asiatic suzerain over a vast and wild expanse of steppeland warrior tribes — a national pathology that goes back centuries — is deeply insinuated into its paranoia over Ukrainians’ gravitation toward Europe. The war is being waged with modern technology, but in spirit, the conflict is feudal.I don’t think you can get a complete picture of Russia’s anxieties and ambitions without considering the country’s pre-modern history. Nobody — and I mean nobody — is better at elucidating those themes than my friend Razib Khan. You’ll know Razib from the last podcast episode I posted (some time ago), which was me as a guest on his show. This time we switched mics.Razib is a population geneticist and a huge history nerd, and his knowledge of the churn and mixture of human populations globally over the course of millennia is awe-inspiring. Our conversation took us from the Vikings to ancient Japan to colonial America, but I tried to keep us focused on the history of the region that is now serving as the potential prelude to the next world war.Be sure to sign up for Razib’s excellent Substack. This is a public episode. Get access to private episodes at leightonwoodhouse.substack.com/subscribe