Podcasts about tooby

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Adam Mastroianni is a scientist who writes the Substack 'Experimental History'. This is our second conversation. We discuss science as a strong-link problem, why everyone is allowed to do science, and some of Adam's suggestions for how science can be done differently.Support the show: https://geni.us/bjks-patreonTimestamps0:00:00: Adam's Substack is now his main thing0:05:32: Paradigms in psychology0:16:40: Who's allowed to do science? Science as a strong-link problem0:36:41: A fleet of ships, The Psychology House, and Dan Gilbert's supervsion1:06:53: How to cultivate good feedback1:13:20: A book, paper, or blog post more people should read1:16:26: Something Adam wishes he'd learnt sooner1:18:34: Any advice for PhD students or postdocs?Podcast linksWebsite: https://geni.us/bjks-podTwitter: https://geni.us/bjks-pod-twtAdam's linksWebsite: https://geni.us/mastroianni-webSubstack: https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/Google Scholar: https://geni.us/mastroianni-scholarTwitter: https://geni.us/mastroianni-twtBen's linksWebsite: https://geni.us/bjks-webGoogle Scholar: https://geni.us/bjks-scholarTwitter: https://geni.us/bjks-twtLinks1st episode with Adam: https://geni.us/bjks-mastroianniPure green in Blackadder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDIJiwNk2n8Blog postshttps://www.experimental-history.com/p/lets-build-a-fleet-and-change-thehttps://www.experimental-history.com/p/an-invitation-to-a-secret-societyhttps://www.experimental-history.com/p/science-is-a-strong-link-problem https://www.experimental-history.com/p/the-experimental-history-experimenthttps://www.experimental-history.com/p/the-rise-and-fall-of-peer-reviewhttps://smallpotatoes.paulbloom.net/p/psychology-is-okhttps://slimemoldtimemold.com/2022/02/10/the-scientific-virtues/Behind the Bastard's episode about libertarians recreating governments at sea: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-the-not-at-all-sad-history-of-89890804/ References Cosmides & Tooby (2015). Neurocognitive adaptations designed for social exchange. The handbook of evo psych.Gilbert (2006). Stumbling on happiness.Hesse (1922). Siddhartha.Mastroianni, AM & Ludwin-Peery, EJ. (2022). Things could be better. https://psyarxiv.com/2uxwk Richerson & Boyd (1978). A dual inheritance model of the human evolutionary process. J of Soc and Bio Structu

Security guards (or 'seccies' we call 'em in the trade) are a core part of the team in every busy hospo venue.  These are the people tasked with keeping the riff raff outside and the good vibes inside.This episode, we interview John Toby, the former head doorman at 90's Sydney's superclub, DCM, and a successful entrepreneur in his own right. The HospoX crew share their door dramas, which include fireworks being shot at the door and guns being pulled. A calm head and balls of steel are mandatory!Special Guest: John Tooby, 8th dan Karate black belt and owner of Toodokan Self Defense Academy in Sydney. Episode sponsor: Hospitality Institute of NSWOUR NEW WEBSITE IS LIVE!Find out more about the crew and grab some HospoX merch here: www.hospox.com.au

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: Contra Yudkowsky on AI Doom, published by jacob cannell on April 24, 2023 on LessWrong. Eliezer Yudkowsky predicts doom from AI: that humanity faces likely extinction in the near future (years or decades) from a rogue unaligned superintelligent AI system. Moreover he predicts that this is the default outcome, and AI alignment is so incredibly difficult that even he failed to solve it. EY is an entertaining and skilled writer, but do not confuse rhetorical writing talent for depth and breadth of technical knowledge. I do not have EY's talents there, or Scott Alexander's poetic powers of prose. My skill points instead have gone near exclusively towards extensive study of neuroscience, deep learning, and graphics/GPU programming. More than most, I actually have the depth and breadth of technical knowledge necessary to evaluate these claims in detail. I have evaluated this model in detail and found it substantially incorrect and in fact brazenly naively overconfident. Intro Even though the central prediction of the doom model is necessarily un-observable for anthropic reasons, alternative models (such as my own, or moravec's, or hanson's) have already made substantially better predictions, such that EY's doom model has low posterior probability. EY has espoused this doom model for over a decade, and hasn't updated it much from what I can tell. Here is the classic doom model as I understand it, starting first with key background assumptions: The brain inefficiency assumption: The human brain is inefficient in multiple dimensions/ways/metrics that translate into intelligence per dollar; inefficient as a hardware platform in key metrics such as thermodynamic efficiency. The mind inefficiency or human incompetence assumption: In terms of software he describes the brain as an inefficient complex "kludgy mess of spaghetti-code". He derived these insights from the influential evolved modularity hypothesis as popularized in ev pysch by Tooby and Cosmides. He boo-hooed neural networks, and in fact actively bet against them in actions by hiring researchers trained in abstract math/philosophy, ignoring neuroscience and early DL, etc. The more room at the bottom assumption: Naturally dovetailing with points 1 and 2, EY confidently predicts there is enormous room for further hardware improvement, especially through strong drexlerian nanotech. The alien mindspace assumption: EY claims human mindspace is an incredibly narrow twisty complex target to hit, whereas the space of AI mindspace is vast, and AI designs will be something like random rolls from this vast alien mindspace resulting in an incredibly low probability of hitting the narrow human target. Doom naturally follows from these assumptions: Sometime in the near future some team discovers the hidden keys of intelligence and creates a human-level AGI which then rewrites its own source code, initiating a self improvement recursion which quickly results in the AGI developing strong nanotech and killing all humans within a matter of days or even hours. If assumptions 1 and 2 don't hold (relative to 3) then there is little to no room for recursive self improvement. If assumption 4 is completely wrong then the default outcome is not doom regardless. Every one of his key assumptions is mostly wrong, as I and others predicted well in advance. EY seems to have been systematically overconfident as an early futurist, and then perhaps updated later to avoid specific predictions, but without much updating his mental models (specifically his nanotech-woo model, as we will see). Brain Hardware Efficiency EY correctly recognizes that thermodynamic efficiency is a key metric for computation/intelligence, and he confidently, brazenly claims (as of late 2021), that the brain is about 6 OOM from thermodynamic efficiency limits: Which brings me to...

Link to original articleWelcome 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: Contra Yudkowsky on AI Doom, published by jacob cannell on April 24, 2023 on LessWrong. Eliezer Yudkowsky predicts doom from AI: that humanity faces likely extinction in the near future (years or decades) from a rogue unaligned superintelligent AI system. Moreover he predicts that this is the default outcome, and AI alignment is so incredibly difficult that even he failed to solve it. EY is an entertaining and skilled writer, but do not confuse rhetorical writing talent for depth and breadth of technical knowledge. I do not have EY's talents there, or Scott Alexander's poetic powers of prose. My skill points instead have gone near exclusively towards extensive study of neuroscience, deep learning, and graphics/GPU programming. More than most, I actually have the depth and breadth of technical knowledge necessary to evaluate these claims in detail. I have evaluated this model in detail and found it substantially incorrect and in fact brazenly naively overconfident. Intro Even though the central prediction of the doom model is necessarily un-observable for anthropic reasons, alternative models (such as my own, or moravec's, or hanson's) have already made substantially better predictions, such that EY's doom model has low posterior probability. EY has espoused this doom model for over a decade, and hasn't updated it much from what I can tell. Here is the classic doom model as I understand it, starting first with key background assumptions: The brain inefficiency assumption: The human brain is inefficient in multiple dimensions/ways/metrics that translate into intelligence per dollar; inefficient as a hardware platform in key metrics such as thermodynamic efficiency. The mind inefficiency or human incompetence assumption: In terms of software he describes the brain as an inefficient complex "kludgy mess of spaghetti-code". He derived these insights from the influential evolved modularity hypothesis as popularized in ev pysch by Tooby and Cosmides. He boo-hooed neural networks, and in fact actively bet against them in actions by hiring researchers trained in abstract math/philosophy, ignoring neuroscience and early DL, etc. The more room at the bottom assumption: Naturally dovetailing with points 1 and 2, EY confidently predicts there is enormous room for further hardware improvement, especially through strong drexlerian nanotech. The alien mindspace assumption: EY claims human mindspace is an incredibly narrow twisty complex target to hit, whereas the space of AI mindspace is vast, and AI designs will be something like random rolls from this vast alien mindspace resulting in an incredibly low probability of hitting the narrow human target. Doom naturally follows from these assumptions: Sometime in the near future some team discovers the hidden keys of intelligence and creates a human-level AGI which then rewrites its own source code, initiating a self improvement recursion which quickly results in the AGI developing strong nanotech and killing all humans within a matter of days or even hours. If assumptions 1 and 2 don't hold (relative to 3) then there is little to no room for recursive self improvement. If assumption 4 is completely wrong then the default outcome is not doom regardless. Every one of his key assumptions is mostly wrong, as I and others predicted well in advance. EY seems to have been systematically overconfident as an early futurist, and then perhaps updated later to avoid specific predictions, but without much updating his mental models (specifically his nanotech-woo model, as we will see). Brain Hardware Efficiency EY correctly recognizes that thermodynamic efficiency is a key metric for computation/intelligence, and he confidently, brazenly claims (as of late 2021), that the brain is about 6 OOM from thermodynamic efficiency limits: Which brings me to...

Lynn Nadel is an emeritus professor at the University of Arizona, where his research focuses on the role of the hippocampus in memory. In this conversation, we talk about the early years of Lynn's career: why he chose to do chemistry, how a course with Donald Hebb made him switch to psychology, how his postdoc was disrupted by the Soviet invasion during the Prague Spring, John O'Keefe's discovery of place cells, how Lynn and O'Keefe wrote The Hippocampus as a Cognitive Map, and much more.BJKS Podcast is a podcast about neuroscience, psychology, and anything vaguely related, hosted by Benjamin James Kuper-Smith.Support the show: https://geni.us/bjks-patreonTimestamps00:00: How Lynn went from studying chemistry to doing a PhD on memory08:35: What was it like working Donald Hebb?15:16: The golden era of cognitive neuroscience at McGill in the 50s and 60s23:14: Lynn's postdoc in Prague was interrupted by the Soviet invasion during Prague Spring36:29: The discovery of place cells and the writing of The Hippocampus as a Cognitive Map50:59: A paper or book Lynn thinks more people should read54:55: Something Lynn wishes he'd learnt sooner57:38: Advice for early career scientistsPodcast linksWebsite: https://geni.us/bjks-podTwitter: https://geni.us/bjks-pod-twtLynn's linksWebsite: https://geni.us/nadel-webMastodon: https://geni.us/nadel-mastodonBen's linksWebsite: https://geni.us/bjks-webGoogle Scholar: https://geni.us/bjks-scholarTwitter: https://geni.us/bjks-twtReferences and linksEpisode w/ Kate Jeffery: https://geni.us/bjks-jefferyKonorski: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_KonorskiJZ Young: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Zachary_YoungGoddard (1983). The kindling model of epilepsy. Trends in Neurosciences.Káli & Dayan (2002). Replay, repair and consolidation. Adv in Neur Info Proc Sys. Klein, Cosmides, Tooby & Chance (2002). Decisions and the evolution of memory: multiple systems, multiple functions. Psych Rev.Konorski (1967). Integrative activity of the brain; an interdisciplinary approach.McClelland, McNaughton & O'Reilly (1995). Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory. Psych Rev.Melzack & Wall (1965). Pain Mechanisms: A New Theory: A gate control system modulates sensory input from the skin before it evokes pain perception and response. Science.Nadel & Buresova (1968). Monocular input and interhemispheric transfer in the reversible split-brain. Nature.Olds & Milner (1954). Positive reinforcement produced by electrical stimulation of septal area and other regions of rat brain. J comp & phys psychol.O'Keefe & Dostrovsky (1971). The hippocampus as a spatial map: preliminary evidence from unit activity in the freely-moving rat. Brain research.O'Keefe & Nadel (1978) The Hippocampus as a Cognitive Map. Oxford University Press.Rao & Ballard (1999). Predictive coding in the visual cortex: a functional interpretation of some extra-classical receptive-field effects. Nat Neuro.Ravindran (2022). Profile of Lynn Nadel. PNAS.

In this episode Marc and Kristina discuss Sex Positivity, its roots in the clash between second and third-wave feminists, whether boundaries still apply, and we discuss sex positivity vis-a-vis an "Untold Story" episode called Sex for Sale that explores the wild and wonderful world of sex work. We will be posting an extension of this discussion on our Patreon. Patreon will be launching The week of 2/28/22. Please join us on social media @seriousproduce or @marceatspeach or @xtemporaneous2. We also have a facebook group genxtemporaneous. Email us at xtemporaneouspod@gmail.com. Sources Sex For Sale (The Untold Story). Doug Glover Clint Lealos Directors. A&E. Apr 18, 2019. Wilson, Margo and Martin Daly. The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Chattel. In, J.H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, J. Tooby, Eds. The Adapted Mind. Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. 1992. Oxford University Press. New York Hills, Rachel. “What Every Generation Gets Wrong About Sex” TIME Magazine. December 2, 2014. https://time.com/3611781/sexual-revolution-revisited/ Sexual Revolution post world war I: https://ehistory.osu.edu/sites/ehistory.osu.edu/files/mmh/clash/NewWoman/Subnarratives/sexualrevolution.htm#:~:text=Sexual%20Revolution,growing%20public%20expression%20of%20sexuality.&text=Part%20of%20what%20made%20the,and%20where%20people%20consumed%20alcohol. Shaitly, Shahesta. Is China's Mosuo tribe the world's last matriarchy? The Guardian. December 2010. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/dec/19/china-mosuo-tribe-matriarchy Copeland, Simon. Equality and polyamory: why early humans weren't The Flintstones. The Guardian. May 2015 https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2015/may/19/equality-and-polyamory-why-early-humans-werent-the-flintstones Sex, scandals and betrayals: Charles II and his court https://www.historyextra.com/period/stuart/sex-scandals-and-betrayals-charles-ii-and-his-court/ Uncredited Essay: Morals: The Second Sexual Revolution. Time. Friday, Jan. 24, 1964. http://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,875692,00.html Ahlin, Maria. Let's Talk Porn: Ted Talk. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBTb71UzPmY ~3 minute time mark The Puritans Really Loved Having Sex. Associated Press for the New York Post. October 21, 2016 https://nypost.com/2016/10/21/the-puritans-really-loved-having-sex/ The Truth About Pleasure & Love in a Victorian Marriage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4Kh5XEA1XA Reagan Williams. Rape Culture: Ted Talk. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_2DU7VTOmk @ 10:19 mark Alexis Jones. Locker Room Talk Says Who?: Ted Talk. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCA6EF3y23k @7 minute mark @8:14 mark 11:00 minutes --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/marc-snediker/support

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: Ritual Report: NYC Less Wrong Solstice Celebration , published by jacob_cannell on the LessWrong. This article presents an emerging architectural hypothesis of the brain as a biological implementation of a Universal Learning Machine. I present a rough but complete architectural view of how the brain works under the universal learning hypothesis. I also contrast this new viewpoint - which comes from computational neuroscience and machine learning - with the older evolved modularity hypothesis popular in evolutionary psychology and the heuristics and biases literature. These two conceptions of the brain lead to very different predictions for the likely route to AGI, the value of neuroscience, the expected differences between AGI and humans, and thus any consequent safety issues and dependent strategies. Art generated by an artificial neural net (The image above is from a recent mysterious post to r/machinelearning, probably from a Google project that generates art based on a visualization tool used to inspect the patterns learned by convolutional neural networks. I am especially fond of the wierd figures riding the cart in the lower left. ) Intro: Two viewpoints on the Mind Universal Learning Machines Historical Interlude Dynamic Rewiring Brain Architecture (the whole brain in one picture and a few pages of text) The Basal Ganglia Implications for AGI Conclusion Intro: Two Viewpoints on the Mind Few discoveries are more irritating than those that expose the pedigree of ideas. -- Lord Acton (probably) Less Wrong is a site devoted to refining the art of human rationality, where rationality is based on an idealized conceptualization of how minds should or could work. Less Wrong and its founding sequences draws heavily on the heuristics and biases literature in cognitive psychology and related work in evolutionary psychology. More specifically the sequences build upon a specific cluster in the space of cognitive theories, which can be identified in particular with the highly influential "evolved modularity" perspective of Cosmides and Tooby. From Wikipedia: Evolutionary psychologists propose that the mind is made up of genetically influenced and domain-specific[3] mental algorithms or computational modules, designed to solve specific evolutionary problems of the past.[4] From "Evolutionary Psychology and the Emotions":[5] An evolutionary perspective leads one to view the mind as a crowded zoo of evolved, domain-specific programs. Each is functionally specialized for solving a different adaptive problem that arose during hominid evolutionary history, such as face recognition, foraging, mate choice, heart rate regulation, sleep management, or predator vigilance, and each is activated by a different set of cues from the environment. If you imagine these general theories or perspectives on the brain/mind as points in theory space, the evolved modularity cluster posits that much of the machinery of human mental algorithms is largely innate. General learning - if it exists at all - exists only in specific modules; in most modules learning is relegated to the role of adapting existing algorithms and acquiring data; the impact of the information environment is de-emphasized. In this view the brain is a complex messy cludge of evolved mechanisms. There is another viewpoint cluster, more popular in computational neuroscience (especially today), that is almost the exact opposite of the evolved modularity hypothesis. I will rebrand this viewpoint the "universal learner" hypothesis, aka the "one learning algorithm" hypothesis (the rebranding is justified mainly by the inclusion of some newer theories and evidence for the basal ganglia as a 'CPU' which learns to control the cortex). The roots of the universal learning hypothesis can be traced back to Mountcastle's discovery of the simpl...

If you have enjoyed this episode, kindly share this with your friends. For comments and suggestions, please write to psychchat@omnipsi.com or tweet to @psych_chat.If you are interested to know more about what OmniPsi Consulting offers, please click on the link www.omnipsi.com.If you are interested to help James in his validation study and you are based in Hong Kong, please contact James directly through the link below:https://www.linkedin.com/in/james-morley-kirk-b244443/References for the research cited or mentioned in the podcast are below Rosnow, R. L. (2001). Rumour and gossip in interpersonal interaction and beyond: A Social Exchange Perspective. In R. M. Kowalski (Ed.), Behaving badly: Aversive behaviours in interpersonal relationships (pp. 203–232). Washington, DC: APA. Rosnow, R. L., & Georgoudi, M. (1985). Killed by idol gossip: The psychology of small talk. In B. Rubin (Ed.), When information counts: Grading the media (pp. 59–73). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books Ben-Ze’ev, A. (1994). The vindication of gossip. In R. F. Goodman & A. Ben-Ze’ev (Eds.), Good gossip (pp. 11–24). Lawrence: University of Kansas Press. Kurland, N. B., & Pelled, L. H. (2000). Passing the word: Toward a model of gossip and power in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 25, 428–438. Noon, M., and Delbridge, R. (1993). News from behind my hand: gossip in organizations. Organ. Stud. 14, 23–36. doi: 10.1177/017084069301400103 Dunbar, R. I., Marriott, A., and Duncan, N. D. (1997). Human conversational behavior. Hum. Nat. 8, 231–246. doi: 10.1007/BF02912493 Dunbar, R. I. (2004). Gossip in evolutionary perspective. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 8,100–110. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.100 Foster, E. K. (2004). Research on gossip: taxonomy, methods, and future directions. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 8, 78–99. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.78 Barkow, J. H. (1992). “Beneath new culture is old psychology: gossip and social stratification,” in The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture, eds J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, and J. Tooby, New York, NY: Oxford University Press), 627–637. Davis, H., and McLeod, S. L. (2003). Why humans value sensational news: an evolutionary perspective. Evol. Hum. Behav. 24, 208–216. doi: 10.1016/S1090- 5138(03)00012-6 Baumeister, R. F., Zhang, L. Q., and Vohs, K. D. (2004). Gossip as cultural learning. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 8, 111–121. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.111 Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D. C., and Pagon, M. (2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Acad. Manag. J. 45, 331–351. Baumeister, R. F., and Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol. Bull. 117, 497–529. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497 Ellwardt, L., Labianca, G. J., andWittek, R. (2012). Who are the objects of positive and negative gossip at work? A social network perspective on workplace gossip. Soc. Netw. 34, 193–205. doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2011.11.003 Aquino, K., and Thau, S. (2009). Workplace victimization: aggression from the target's perspective. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 60, 717–741. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163703 Chandra, G., and Robinson, S. L. (2010). “They’re talking about me again: the impact of being the target of gossip on emotional distress and withdrawal,” in Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Boston, MA. Waddington, K., and Michelson, G. (2007). “Analyzing gossip to reveal and understand power relationships, political action and reaction to change inside organizations,” in Paper Presented at the 5th International Critical Management Studies Conference, Manchester. Bok, S. (1989). Secrets: On the Ethics of Concealment and Revelation. New York, NY: Vintage. Grosser, T. J., Lopez-Kidwell, V., Labianca, G., and Ellwardt, L. (2012). Hearing it through the grapevine: positive and negative workplace gossip. Organ. Dyn. 41, 52–61. doi: 10.1016/j.orgdyn.2011.12.007 Kniffin, K. M., and Wilson, D. S. (2010). Evolutionary perspectives on workplace gossip: why and how gossip can serve groups. Group Organ. Manag. 35,150–176. doi: 10.1177/1059601109360390 Salmansohn, K. (2016). Think happy: Instant peptalks to boost positivity. Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press. Danziger, E. (1988). Minimize office gossip. The Personnel Journal, 67, 31–35. Porterfield, E. (2008). Gossip can be toxic to the workplace – And your reputation. The Seattle Times. http://www.seattletimes.com/life/ lifestyle/gossip-can-be-toxic-to-the-workplace-8212-and-yourreputation/. Wu, L., Birtch, T. A., Chiang, F. F., & Zhang, H. (2018). Perceptions of negative workplace gossip: A self-consistency theory framework. Journal of Management, 44, 1873–1898. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316632057. Kuo, C., Chang, K., Quinton, S., Lu, C., & Lee, I. (2015). Gossip in the workplace and the implications for HR management: A study of gossip and its relationship to employee cynicism. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26,2288–2307. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2014.985329. Foster, E. K. (2004). Research on gossip: Taxonomy, methods, and future directions. Review of General Psychology, 8, 78–99. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.78.

Human DNA, the molecule of inheritance, carries the entire set of instructions for making a complete person from a single fertilised egg.''The mind and culture are living phenomena sprung from genetics.’' is view espoused in Promethean Fire Reflections on the Origin of Mind written by Charles J. Lumsden and Edward O. Wilson. Illustrations by Whitney Powell. 216 pp. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Historically, explanation has been associated with causation and in an attempt to explain the posited theory IS THERE A SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP EXISTING BETWEEN CULTURE & DNA ISBN 978-1-63848-303-8.WORKS CITEDAlberts B, Johnson A, Lewis J, Raff M, Roberts K, Walter P (2014). Molecular Biology of the Cell (6th ed.). Garland. p. Chapter 4: DNA, Chromosomes and Genomes. ISBN 978-0-8153-4432-2. Archived from the original on 14 July 2014.Alberts B, Johnson A, Lewis J, Raff M, Roberts K, Peter W (2002). Molecular Biology of the Cell (Fourth ed.). New York and London: Garland Science. ISBN 0-8153-3218-1. OCLC 145080076. Archived from the original on 1 November 2016Bentley, R.A.; Hahn, M.W.; Shennan, S.J. (2004). "Random drift and culture change". Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 271 (1547): 1443–1450. doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2746. PMC 1691747. PMID 15306315Berg J, Tymoczko J, Stryer L (2002). Biochemistry. W.H. Freeman and Company. ISBN 0-7167-4955-6Berg J, Tymoczko J, Stryer L (2002). Biochemistry. W.H. Freeman and Company. ISBN 0-7167-4955-6.Boyd, R.; Richerson, P.J. (1988). Culture and the Evolutionary Process. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0226069333.Boyd, R.; Richerson, P.J. (2005). The Origin and Evolution of Cultures. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0195181456.Boyd, R.; Richerson, P.J. (2005). The Origin and Evolution of Cultures. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0195181456.Carell T, Kurz MQ, Müller M, Rossa M, Spada F (April 2018). "Non-canonical Bases in the Genome: The Regulatory Information Layer in DNA". Angewandte Chemie. 57 (16): 4296–4312. doi:10.1002/anie.201708228. PMID 28941008.Confer et al. 2010; Buss, 2005; Durrant & Ellis, 2003; Pinker, 2002; Tooby & Cosmides, 2005Cosmides, L.; Tooby, J. (13 January 1997). "Evolutionary Psychology: A Primer". Center for Evolutionary Psychology. Retrieved 22 July 2016. Created from PDB 1D65Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica, 2011. Web. 23 January 2011.Ghosh A, Bansal M (April 2003). "A glossary of DNA structures from A to Z". Acta Crystallographica Section D. 59 (Pt 4): 620–26. doi:10.1107/S0907444903003251. ISSN 0907-4449. PMID 12657780.Gittens, William Anderson,Author, Cinematographer Dip.Com., Arts. B.A. Media Arts Specialists’ License Cultural  Practitioner, Publisher,CEO Devgro Media Arts Ser-vices®2015,Editor in Chief of Devgro Media Arts Services Pub-lishing®2015  Gregory SG, Barlow KF, McLay KE, Kaul R, Swarbreck D, Dunham A, et al. (May 2006). "The DNA sequence and biological annotation of human chromosome 1". Nature. 441 (7091): 315–21. Bibcode:2006Natur.441..315G. doi:10.1038/nature04727. PMID 16710414. acid". http://assessment.aaas.org/items/1/RH/301/RH011001http://reachinghighernh.org/2018/07/26/culture-of-thinking/https://www.dnaworldwide.com/resource/160/history-dna-timeline"cultural evolution | social science". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2017-03-30. "deoxyribonucleic http://www.macmillandictionaryblog.com/its-all-in-the-genes-dna-and-metaphorhttps://blog.jostle.me/blog/10-elements-of-a-strong-culturehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_evolutionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNAhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychologyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EvoSupport the show (http://www.buzzsprout.com/429292)

Si vous deviez créer un programme de recherche pour étudier l'esprit humain, comment vous y prendriez-vous ? Présentation de la réflexion d'une poignée de chercheurs dans les années 80/90. Première vidéo d'une longue série ! Psychologie évolutionniste, evopsy (prends ça moteur de recherche). Le gène égoïste sur Amazon (lien affiliation) : https://amzn.to/3iiSBK6 Ce n'est que grâce à votre soutien que je peux affecter mes gènes à la production de vidéos ! Si vous aimez leur travail et souhaitez qu'il continue, faites augmenter ma fitness sur uTip ou Tipeee : https://utip.io/homofabulus https://tipeee.com/homofabulus/ (Vous pouvez aussi y acheter des t-shirts et mugs stylés. Merci à toutes et tous pour votre soutien !) Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/H0moFabulus/ Twitter : https://twitter.com/homofabulus pour les infos strictement liées à la chaîne et https://twitter.com/stdebove pour mon compte perso alimenté plus régulièrement Insta : https://www.instagram.com/stephanedebove/ Musique : Jingle Bells par Jobii Moonbeams par Gregory David Références : 1. Darwin. L'origine Des Espèces (1859). 2. Tooby, J. & Cosmides, L. in The Adapted Mind (1992). 3. Pinker, S. How the Mind Works Unabridged édition. Anglais. isbn : 978-1-4915-1496-2 (Brilliance Audio, New York, 1997). 4. Dawkins, R. Le gène égoïste French. isbn : 978-2-7381-1243-9 (1976). 5. Chomsky, N. Syntactic Structures English. isbn : 978-90-279-3385-0 (Mouton, The Hague, 1957). 6. Harlow, H. F. Learning to Love English. isbn : 978-0-87668-159-6 (Jason Aronson Inc. Publishers, New York, 1971). 7. Tooby, J. & Cosmides, L. en. in The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology 1-85 (American Cancer Society, 2015). isbn : 978-1-119-12556-3. 8. Buss, D. M. The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology Vol. 1 isbn : 978-1-118-75588-4 (2016). 9. Dennett, D. C. Darwin's Dangerous Idea - Evolution and the Meanings of Life Illustrated edition. English. isbn : 978-0-684-82471-0 (Simon & Schuster, New York, 1995).

My guest for this episode is Randy White. Randy is the co-Chair of the leadership stream for the EMBA at HEC (Qatar) and a long-time professor of leadership for TRIUM. He is an international thought leader in leadership training and executive coaching with more than 30 years’ experience from all over the world. His is also a member of the Board of the American Psychological Association. A new edition of his (co-written with Philip Hodgson) excellent book, Relax its Only Uncertainty will be released later this month. In this episode, Randy and I discuss the leadership challenges in a world where the nature of the uncertainty we face is changing. How does a leader effectively and confidently lead other people when s/he cannot be sure what is the best path forward? Randy’s wisdom and decency shine through in our talk – enjoy!Related Material:-- Randy's new book: Hodgson, P. & White, R. (2020) Relax, It’s Only Uncertainty: Lead the way when the way is changing. The Executive Development Group. https://www.amazon.com/Relax-Its-Only-Uncertainty-Changing-dp-0578713535/dp/0578713535/ref=dp_ob_title_bk#customerReviews-- Randy's recommended book: Ou, A. Y., Waldman, D. A. & Peterson, S. J. (2015), ‘Do Humble CEOs Matter? An Examination of CEO Humility and Firm Outcomes,’ Journal of Management (20:10, pp. 1-27). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283950957_Do_Humble_CEOs_Matter_An_Examination_of_CEO_Humility_and_Firm_Outcomes-- Works mentioned: Bahcall, S. (2020) Loonshots: How to nuture the craxy ideas that win wars, cure diseases, and transform industries. St. Martins Press. https://www.amazon.com/Loonshots-Nurture-Diseases-Transform-Industries/dp/1250185963 Cosmides, L & Tooby, J. (1992).’Cognitive Adaptions for Social Exchange,’ in Barkow, J.; Cosmides, L, & Tooby, J. (eds.). The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. Oxford University Press. pp. 163–228. https://www.cep.ucsb.edu/papers/Cogadapt.pdfWason, P. C. (1968), ‘Reasoning about a rule,’ Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (20:3, pp. 273–281). http://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/biases/20_Quarterly_J_Experimental_Psychology_273_(Wason).pdfHost: Matt Mulford | Guest: Randy White | Editor: Théophile Letort See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Universidad Francisco Marroquín granted Leda Cosmides and John Tooby an honorary doctoral degree in social sciences, the maximum distinction of this house of studies and named them honorary professors for their work on evolutionary psychology and liberty. Leda reflects on the climate of free speech and truly liberal education that UFM offers and later talks about her context growing up, where she questioned herself, isn't there a better way to live? And realized she would find that answer by studying human nature through psychology; this then led her to study economics to understand the interaction between people. "There can be intuitions that we have that certain kinds of policies are good, when in fact when you analyze them cautiously in a large society like this, they turn out to be disastrous”. - Leda Cosmides Cosmides finally talks about the importance of a free society for the pursuit of happiness, in societies where millions of people interact, and each person's own decisions and values should be respected. Tooby later shows his gratitude for the honorary doctorate. Comments on Leonardo Da Vinci, who was considered the smartest man, despite not knowing calculus; something that most students probably learned and gives them an advantage. John, from and evolutionary perspective describes the advantages other species have and what in his opinion is the human kind advantage. "Our specialization is cognitive, is knowledge, is learning. The thing which makes humans unique is our ability to learn, to discover and share”. - John Tooby Tooby end his speech talking about the discovery of truth, which is a hard task, and gives examples on how the collective beliefs are not always the correct. He encourages students to download new knowledge to their head and keep searching for evidence of what's truth.

Leda Cosmides and John Tooby, who have dedicated their life to the study of evolutionary psychology, were named honorary professors of Universidad Francisco Marroquín, during the Ceremony for Honor Graduates of May 2019, for their work on the understanding of psychological roots behind the generalized propention in favor of collectivist policies that endanger individual freedom. Cosmides comments on how special Universidad Francisco Marroquín is, for the principles and education it gives to its students. Also talks about how from a very young age she got interested on how society worked and eventually that led her to work on evolutionary psychology. Leda then advises the students on how to communicate the valuable ideas learned at UFM. "What I've learned over the years is that you just have to keep having the conversation, with respect for the other people that disagree with you (...) just tell them as clear as you can what you think and what you know, and everything will be ok”. - Leda Cosmides Then, Tooby also congratulates the parents and students for their accomplishment, that represents really hard work. John talks about his education on economics, how he questioned socialist ideas and then got inspired by Frederic Bastiat's ideas. "Always, whatever else you're doing, make sure that you're spending some time learning some important new intellectual skill”. - John Tooby Now watch their speech during the May 2019 Commencement, where they were granted an honorary doctoral degree on social sciences.

------------------Support the channel------------ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter ------------------Follow me on--------------------- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheDissenterYT SORRY ABOUT THE AUDIO AND VIDEO ISSUES, THE INTERNET CONNECTION WAS WEAK. HOPE YOU ENJOY IT. Dr. Peter Richerson is Distinguished Professor Emeritus of the Department of Environmental Science and Policy at the University of California, Davis. He's a biologist with interest in cultural evolution, animal social learning and mathematical models. He's also the author of books like Culture and the Evolutionary Process, Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution, and The Origin and Evolution of Cultures, all written in collaboration with Dr. Robert Boyd. In this episode, we talk about culture, cultural evolution, and gene-culture coevolution. We start off with a definition of culture and the relationship between biology and culture. Then, we talk about culture as a phenotype, how culture evolved, and the cognitive bases of it. We go through some of the main scientific approaches to culture and their drawbacks, including Leda Cosmides and John Tooby's evoked culture, the sociobiologists and inclusive fitness, and Richard Dawkins' memetics. We also refer to gene-culture coevolution, and how group selection work are the cultural and genetic levels. Time Links: 00:53 The relationship between Biology and Culture 02:57 What is culture? 04:41 Are there units of selection in culture, like ideas, beliefs, and norms? 07:32 Is there culture in other species? 08:56 Is culture part of the phenotype? And unique aspects of human culture 10:50 The cognitive bases of culture 15:45 How learning and culture evolved 19:28 Why is culture so rare in other animals? 22:58 Culture as environment 27:13 Cosmides and Tooby approach to culture (evoked culture) 30:49 When culture is maladaptive 33:09 About memetics, and the “meme” concept 36:31 Cultural group selection 42:48 Does group selection also occur at the genetic level? 48:14 Are there any purely biological or purely cultural aspects of human nature? 51:47 Follow Dr. Richerson's work! -- Follow Dr. Richerson's work: Faculty page: https://tinyurl.com/ya8h54z3 Articles on Researchgate: https://tinyurl.com/y7zgx29d Books: https://tinyurl.com/y8236hn6 -- A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS: KARIN LIETZCKE, ANN BLANCHETTE, JUNOS, SCIMED, PER HELGE HAAKSTD LARSEN, LAU GUERREIRO, RUI BELEZA, MIGUEL ESTRADA, ANTÓNIO CUNHA, CHANTEL GELINAS, JIM FRANK, JERRY MULLER, FRANCIS FORD, HANS FREDRIK SUNDE, BRIAN RIVERA AND ADRIANO ANDRADE! I also leave you with the link to a recent montage video I did with the interviews I have released until the end of June 2018: https://youtu.be/efdb18WdZUo And check out my playlists on: PSYCHOLOGY: https://tinyurl.com/ybalf8km PHILOSOPHY: https://tinyurl.com/yb6a7d3p ANTHROPOLOGY: https://tinyurl.com/y8b42r7g

This episode features: -Why men perceive more sexuality in women’s behavior than women say they intend -Several opportunities to test your own biases -Examples of how both evolutionary psychologists and social psychologists have explained bias the wrong way -Why it’s unsatisfactory to say that we have false beliefs in order to “make ourselves feel good” -Why do people ignore basic probability theory -Why are people bad at abstract logic -How to make people much better at logic problems -An explanation of the famous “Linda Problem”   Full transcript   -References- Apply Psychology: Brown, J. D. (2012). Understanding the better than average effect: Motives (still) matter. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(2), 209-219.  Cosmides, L. (1989). The logic of social exchange: Has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with the Wason selection task. Cognition, 31(3), 187-276. Cosmides, L., Barrett, H. C., & Tooby, J. (2010). Adaptive specializations, social exchange, and the evolution of human intelligence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 200914623. Fiddick, L., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2000). No interpretation without representation: The role of domain-specific representations and inferences in the Wason selection task. Cognition, 77(1), 1-79. Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 81–91 Haselton, M. G., Nettle, D., & Murray, D. R. (2015). The evolution of cognitive bias. The handbook of evolutionary psychology, 1-20. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. London: Penguin Books. Perilloux, C., & Kurzban, R. (2015). Do men overperceive women’s sexual interest?. Psychological Science, 26(1), 70-77. Positive Illusions Wikipedia Check This Rec: Carroll, S. M. (2018). Why Is There Something, Rather Than Nothing?. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.02231.

In this episode, we're joined by Alex Tooby of AlexTooby.com. Alex is a master of turning a follower on Instagram into money in the bank, and she's here to discuss her method to marketing on Instagram, how to cultivate the best feed for your business, and her top advice for beginners just starting out with online courses and Instagram.   Resources Mentioned: ✅SIGN UP FOR ALEX'S FREE INSTAGRAM COURSE HERE: https://alextooby.com/iga   Follow Mariah on other platforms:

Instagram has exploded as one of the most powerful social media networks for building a brand. But it's frustrating to many direct response marketers because of the limitations it places on users. This means they have to be smart and creative to reach their audience effectively. But the opportunities are endless for smart marketers who take the time to understand what works and what doesn't on Instagram. My wife and I have been building out our own Instagram following for her coffee brand, @StilettoCoffee and I've felt the frustration. Then I stumbled across a couple accounts run by today's guest, Alex Tooby and asked her to be on the show because she is absolutely killing it with her own Instagram accounts and she's helping others do the same. Meet Alex Tooby 26 year old from Vancouver BC, Canada Built a targeted, engaged, and profitable following of over 385k people (and counting!) I teach business owners, entrepreneurs and bloggers how to reach their ideal clients, build a community of loyal followers & bank massive profit on Instagram! Follow Alex Here http://AlexTooby.com http://instagram.com/instawithalex http://instagram.com/menandcoffee http://instagram.com/womenandcoffee

 In this episode, we recap key concepts that were covered in episode 17 with Instagram expert Alex Tooby and episode 22 with certified therapist John Cordray.

In this episode, we interview an Instagram expert on how to grow a community on Instagram, how to connect our marketing to both Instagram and to Facebook, and how to really grow relationships through social media today.

Pooty Wooty Booty Tooty Booby Tooby See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Tooby and deVore argued that hominin evolution hinged on the exploitation of a unique 'cognitive niche'. We propose that a diversity of evidence indicates this was fundamentally a socio-cognitive niche. Analysis of hunter-gatherer ethnologies confirms unprecedented levels of egalitarian behaviour, cooperation and culture, in comparison to other primates and inferred ancestral stages. In conjunction with recent archaeological findings on the evolution of hunting, we use these data to reconstruct socio-cognitive changes in the course of hominin evolution, including joint planning and the impact of language. Precursors to these characteristics are inferred on the basis of recent observational and experimental studies of non-human primates' socio-cognitive abilities including cultural transmission, psychological attributions and understanding the requirements of cooperation. Presented by Andrew Whiten and David Erdal (Psychology, University of St. Andrews, UK).

Tooby and deVore argued that hominin evolution hinged on the exploitation of a unique 'cognitive niche'. We propose that a diversity of evidence indicates this was fundamentally a socio-cognitive niche. Analysis of hunter-gatherer ethnologies confirms unprecedented levels of egalitarian behaviour, cooperation and culture, in comparison to other primates and inferred ancestral stages. In conjunction with recent archaeological findings on the evolution of hunting, we use these data to reconstruct socio-cognitive changes in the course of hominin evolution, including joint planning and the impact of language. Precursors to these characteristics are inferred on the basis of recent observational and experimental studies of non-human primates' socio-cognitive abilities including cultural transmission, psychological attributions and understanding the requirements of cooperation. Presented by Andrew Whiten and David Erdal (Psychology, University of St. Andrews, UK).

John Tooby is best known for his work in pioneering the new field of evolutionary psychology, along with Templeton Research co–Fellow Leda Cosmides. For the last two decades, Tooby and his collaborators have been integrating cognitive science, cultural anthropology, evolutionary biology, paleoanthropology, cognitive neuroscience, and hunter–gatherer studies to create the new field of evolutionary psychology. The goal of evolutionary psychology is the progressive mapping of the universal evolved cognitive and neural architecture that constitutes human nature, and provides the basis of the learning mechanisms responsible for culture. Tooby uses cross–cultural, experimental, and neuroscience techniques to investigate specific cognitive specializations for cooperation, group psychology, and human reasoning. Through the Center for Evolutionary Psychology, Tooby directs a field station in Ecuadorian Amazonia in order to conduct cross–cultural studies of psychological adaptations and human behavioral ecology. He is particularly interested in documenting how the design of these adaptations shapes cultural and social phenomena, and potentially forms the foundation for a new, more precise generation of social and cultural theories. The lead author and co–author on countless papers, articles, and research studies, Tooby co–edited the pioneering work, The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture in 1992. He and Cosmides have two books forthcoming—Universal Minds: Explaining the New Science of Evolutionary Psychology and Evolutionary Psychology: Foundation Papers. Among several other projects, Tooby is also working on a book on the evolution of sexual reproduction and genetic systems. The emerging discourse of transhumanism affords Tooby and Cosmides the opportunity to reflect on their research findings about human nature in a context of rapidly changing biotechnology. What is it that makes us human? And what is it, if anything, that makes us transhuman? Tooby has also contributed to such popular venues as the New York Times and Slate Magazine. He has been the recipient of a J. S. Guggenheim Fellowship and has served as President of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society. Tooby and Cosmides received the NIH Director’s Pioneer Award and were named Templeton Research co–Fellows by Arizona State University in 2006.

John Tooby (University of California, Santa Barbara) is Professor of Anthropology and co–director of UCSB’ Center for Evolutionary Psychology, where he and his collaborators use cross–cultural, experimental, and neuroscience techniques to investigate specific cognitive specializations for cooperation, group psychology, and human reasoning. Under Tooby’ direction, the Center maintains a field station in Ecuadorian Amazonia in order to conduct cross–cultural studies of psychological adaptations and human behavioral ecology. He is particularly interested in documenting how the design of these adaptations shapes cultural and social phenomena, and potentially forms the foundation for a new, more precise generation of social and cultural theories. For the last two decades, Tooby and his collaborators have been integrating cognitive science, cultural anthropology, evolutionary biology, paleoanthropology, cognitive neuroscience, and hunter–gatherer studies to create the new field of evolutionary psychology. His numerous scientific papers and publications include, The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture, and two forthcoming books—Universal Minds: Explaining the New Science of Evolutionary Psychology and Evolutionary Psychology: Foundational Papers. He has been the recipient of a J. S. Guggenheim Fellowship and has served as President of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society. Tooby and his principal collaborator, Leda Cosmides, were named Templeton Research Fellows by ASU in 2006.

Leda Cosmides is best known for her work with John Tooby in pioneering the new field of evolutionary psychology. This multidisciplinary new approach weaves together evolutionary biology, cognitive science, human evolution, hunter gatherer studies, neuroscience, and psychology into a new approach to discovering the mechainsms of the human mind and brain. According to this new view, by understanding the adaptive problems our hunter–gatherer ancestors faced during their evolution, researchers can uncover the detailed functional designs of the emotions, reasoning “instincts” and motivations that human evolution produced. Cosmides is professor of psychology and anthropology at the University of California, Santa Barbara, where she co–directs the Center for Evolutionary Psychology with John Tooby. She was educated at Harvard and Stanford (postdoctoral). Awards for her research with Tooby include the American Association for the Advancement of Science Prize for Behavioral Science Research, the American Psychological Association’s Early Career Award; a National Science Foundation Presidential Young Investigator Award, and a J. S. Guggenheim Fellowship.