@Truth Is In Nature - I realized when I was 15 that if everyone who was trying to better the world stopped, and began working on bettering themselves, in that moment we would have world peace. .. 30+ years later and I am only slowly beginning to see just how many people seek, and require to engage others, to judge and correct, or judge and vilify, or judge and belittle. The self righteousness is so ingrained, so foundational to the id and personality, that really intelligent people can't see it in themselves. The topic, whatever it may be, is taken for granted, so when questioned they answer, 'What are you talking about? Like you would do it differently.', or, 'Your idea is just crazy, you are bitter, or a troublemaker,' etc. etc. lol. imo it's ridiculous proportions, like everyone I meet. They will laugh at you, recruit others to support them, belittle you, discredit you, dismiss you, reaffirm themselves to themselves and others, all before considering the information for a second, and without offering a single conversational point, argument or refutation, except, of course, 'No, I don't think so.'
Bat Fink yes one of the laws of thermodynamics I get that. But to say the first cell never died is like saying the first man never died. Sounds a bit murky.
so basically humans discovering oil was like a teenager discovering red bull. For a while it made things awesome, but eventually their teeth rotted out and they got really really fat then died of related consequences.
@eddie money which part of the lack of info are you talking about in your largely ad hominem comment? Have you done a video about the subject, or written a book so we can escape theorizing about the video's informational deficiencies? Otherwise, perhaps you didn't understand the conversation?
@eddie money You're the one having problems with understanding. You also seem to have a problem with outlining your ideas (if you have any). Calling people brain dead is hardly anything other but a playground insult - probably about your age, I imagine. If you care to expand on your original ad hominem statement, please feel free - otherwise, everyone might think you a massive pointless exhalation of gas.
Who speaks this way? He's apparently sui generis . "Government is an agent that imposes an offset on payout metrics to make your Nash Equilibrium compatible with the common good." I love this guy.
@Nob the Knave In Germany it's really common to use academic language to explain something if you have an academic background and talk about academic related issues, I guess that the guest just wanted to state his opinion in a factual right way
@Nob the Knave But, ironically one cannot attain the vocabulary without having read many books. For him these words are easy to utilize for his purposes. They convey certain nuances that are important to him. Jazz musicians use their deep comprehension of music to play melodies that make unindoctrinated feel confused, like a language they just can't comprehend. Same concept.
"Governments impose a system of penalties and rewards on individuals to ensure that the good of the one yields, as much as possible, the good of the many." If you can't say it normally, then you're putting on airs and are simply being eliter-than-thou; in other words: a snob. And on the issue, of the needs of the many versus the needs of the few, Uhura (whose name means freedom) had a few things to say here to Tuvok and others on Vulcan [and yes, the actual performers returned to play their roles] ... ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-kFqAME7dx58.html
@@RockBrentwood tbh for me as someone who is from a economics & business background nash equilibrium makes much more sense for the conversation... dude why shouldn't you use the correct terms if you want to explain something? If someone asks me about some macroeconomic related issue I won't answer the person with highschool related economics but rather with substance right? And if there are questions about words dude just ask :D nothing with snobbity here you guys are overanalyzing
@@RockBrentwood the minority seem to want destruction of the very living organism that keeps us alive, but yet to say that for the majority of the mass would appear to reject such suffering, in order to satisfy the minority? With the understanding of the purposeful manipulation on the conscious.
I love how happy and *GIGGLY* this guy sometimes gets when he talks about the end of civilization. This guy would be on my list of dudes who wouldnt mind ending humans. lmao
@The House that Jack Built I think maybe thats what forces our species to innovate . To create, to explore , to discover. Yeah. Earth would have run out of food decades ago without modern farming and genetic seed manipulation and computing power and electricity and new tractors. Shit you never even think of. So yeah were now "running out of space" but not really. and thats also maybe why we should invest more on going to mars. lol
My grandfather, who is 95 and didn’t have electricity while he was growing up, says the only people who want to go back to the old days are the people who didn’t live in them.
I can't express how grateful I am that there are people like Bach and Lex participating in the online sphere, and talking about these important topics. The world needs these conversations.
"Closed cooling chain" was brilliant. Makes me think that everyone lives within their survival chain. Which is house-work-store. And for vacation we get to leave it for a few days and experience someone elses survival chain.
@@BM-is5ei exactly. And I don’t think you would use it in English. He does this with a lot of terms actually. In fact he is like a literal translator. I think that’s why lots of people don’t understand what he is saying
@@BM-is5ei that is absolutely true. It’s part of cultural differences. Same thing with American and British or even Aussie English. Sometimes words have a different meaning. It’s difficult to learn if you don’t live in the country
@@cbongiova Yeah, I didn't want to jump the gun before I finished watching the whole clip, but now that I'm finished I've gotta say... If you think this guy is an idiot, then you are in idiot. He explained pretty much everything he said very clearly. My guess is that you are the one who has global warming derangement syndrome and your brain basically shut down the second he said two words that you didn't agree. I'll also mention that discussion of that topic covered like 5% of the total conversation.
Hoping for technological solutions to societal problems is like trying to run away from your own shadow. I like this guest way more than others that have been technology evangelicals, he's refreshingly honest about the problem and his contribution to it. No app or fancy rocket will fix our own mess when everything we create is imbued with our inherent faults. That's like raising your children with your own messed up values and then expecting them to fix everything later on.
- @Bastian - Your response . . . open to interpretation . One . . . negative . . . perspective is that ' ya are encouraging D E N I A L . That type of severance . -- O R -- Maybe ' ya mean a more meditative temporary severance from what one perceives as chaotic anxieties . Awoomm . Maybe ' ya. mean one should plunge . . . . . . deeply // inwardly . Turn off the lights . Delve into one ' s dark // inner - self . - Whatever ' ya mean to say . . . I am here and now thinking of that flawed geographical " " solution " " that they warn against at A A meetings : " " Be careful . Know that No matter where you go . . . there you are . " " - Attempting to run from oneself . . . N O T - Recommended - -- S m i l e s . -
@GWT123 No matter the political color, both parties have done a lot of good and bad. It's not about politics, it's about energy. Energy is what keeps the show running. Now that peak oil is past (2018), we're going downhill and nothing can reverse the trend. You should read J.A Tainter's book... You will realize soon that the fate of mankind doesn't depend of the puppets that think they are in charge
One of the dumbest people alive pretending to be smart by memorizing weird phrasing of common observations and rapidly spouting them out( Because they’re memorized) making other dumb people think this guy is smart. SMH
@Phoenix We need to vote in people that are not taking corporate money I don't think it matters anymore if they are Republican or Democrat. A powerful third party would be good to break this duopoly.
It's pretty clear to me that AI won't bring the downfall of our civilization. It can't save it either. No matter how good your AI is, it can't prevent mobs of idiots from hurting both themselves and others.
We cannot stop rising sea level possibly three meters or ten foot over the next hundred years but we could stop climate change. Planting trees then cutting them down and using the wood for building or furniture would keep carbon locked away and renewables and fusion will provide us with all the energy we need. Evolution is ruthless and opportunistic but it is not intelligent. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-b34al8YmQSA.html
Software does not write itself nor can it. Intelligence requires self awareness ( conciousness) A machine cannot be concious even if it seems to be,any more than a sculpture can be real. Pinnochio was never a real boy.
@@johndelong5574 One exaflop is equivalent to the human brain and we are building exascale computers now so we will soon know if they can become self aware.
@@bacomiric if you understand the meaning of greed, you must realize every living thing on earth is greedy. It's kind of vacuous to point it out. My real question is.. why does that matter to you?
@@bacomiric right on, I do really like this quote. In kind, I will leave my own.. Despite the philosophy of which you subscribe, you will find it quite necessary to fulfill your desires. It is no more possible to deny your desires than to predict your next thought.
I am Canadian and we have Social Democracy and after travelling about the world for a number of years I am always so glad to come home. I have found that Social Democracy is the best....why can't we all be a Social Democracy?
Do you ask seriously? You need for this specific set of circumstances: 1) high human capital (not only education, but I'm afraid also genetics) 2) high social cohesion (at best single predominant ethnic group) While indeed nice, I'm not so convinced about its long term feasibility as it start to to attract outsiders who don't share local values, don't contribute much and are drain on local resources. So I'm afraid that there is only some window of opportunity and it's slowly ending.
@@bradhaaf4749 You know, when twin studies show that for adult in modern society IQ is 80% genetic, I don't see how one can say that it does not matter. Additionally, research is also clear cut - diversity is reducing trust and social cohesion.
Cooling/heating to a livable condition is done by Earthships (I moved into one in Taos, NM) - the mass of the Earth always keeps us at very comfortable livable temperatures. Underground homes are similar & caves...
Lex ' s mind does N O T function with the Grease -- Lightning -- Speed that Joscha ' s does . That is N O T a jab // stab at L ex . Joscha is simply . . . soooooo . . . A M A Z I N G .
So glad Lex stopped and asked about words. So many people are incapable of acknowledging they don't know what something means, or misheard, and simply nod their heads even though they don't understand what they heard. Props to Lex.
Joscha's idea of plants perhaps being more intelligent than us, just on a different time-line is intriguing. Makes me think of Tom Bombadil's land in Lord of the Rings. Maybe Tolkien had something there.
7:44 haha, love that notion that humans are Gaia's ploy to put carbon back into the atmosphere. Reminds me of that George Carlin bit where he talks about how our main goal on the planet may be to create plastic so the planet can claim it for itself. Great video. Joscha is one smart cookie.
Great conversation. I love the idea that the planet and plants are on a different time scale and that their only purpose is to get back to carbon rich, and it needed to create humans to get the carbon back out again! So much deeper, but amazingly interesting.
Brian Cox once said the damage we are doing t earth will make it inhabitable for humans. But the planet itself has seen much harsher times and will be able to recover
From this mass extinction no life will recover. Co extinction will annihilate all planetary life due to environmental change. Nature, Strona and Bradshaw, 2018
@@lowieapitz8575 dont you worry, nature will overtake all. Simply because, nature is all there is. It will just return to its equilibrium without our constant interfering.
13:01 Yes and no. When it's so dry and hot that your sweat just immediately evaporates, you don't get to cool down much and then you're looking at heat stroke given enough time. Welcome to places like Death Valley, Bullhead City, Las Vegas and Phoenix. Dry is better than really humid, but that only goes so far. Lots of people have died after going out in the desert in mid-summer when their vehicle broke down. But I do agree with the premise that places like Las Vegas would have very few people were it not for air conditioning.
Ideas is a two edge sword. That’s great that our current instantaneous ability to share “good” ideas but it also allows a level playing field for “bad” ideas. It’s is easily demonstrable, both past and present, that an individual can take even the most well meaning peoples down a road of bad ideas.
Joscha Bach has a very insightful, intelligent view. He mentions our problems AND mentions common solutions... definitely going to check out some more of Joscha Bach's videos. I would love to hear a q&a with Bach and Elon. 🤔🤓
I find you, Lex to be a very switched on person with a humble yet greatly intelligent mind... and by learning and sharing info with the experts on your show, you are likely to be the one to have the "brainwave" that will bring forth "life changing" concepts that can be put into practice to solve many of the issues discussed. Thank your channel.
Fucking hell. I'm 19 minutes in and this man keeps dropping one cosmically profound, societally clefting idea after the other like he's readings items off a menu. He has a way of clearly and unflinchingly stating such powerful truths. Feels like I'm somehow benching twice what I usually would be able to in my mind. So great!
He has time to think about these ideas and then presents them in quick succession. It would help if he expanded on his ideas a bit longer. Even if this means that we'll have to enjoy him for a few more podcasts
@@Mixima101 it makes sense after you realise that we live in a universe with 3 spatial dimensions (3d space) and 1 temporal dimension (1d time) but all together they create this weird hybrid 4d object called spacetime which can essentially be thought of as a single uniform thing the same way that multiple threads woven together create a single uniform fabric.
@rvidal0001 "Conservatives?" This talk solves nothing. Come on man, I'm a libertarian, you're shining a negative bitter light on these views. I'd like to think of them as our views, you've made that clear. I'm not trying to be contrary or negative, but, I can tell you for a 100 percent fact that neither side really understands the science and nuance of said science regarding climate change. At least the populace doesn't, generally, because it has became devisive. They take examples from wildly different schools of thought that compound different data, and expound upon that data regarding different theories without having a model to exhibit actual "proof." Don't be a victim of irony in your rhetoric, the consequences of the "fishes" and the ocean are the most glaring example of the negative impacts of climate change, especially in the rivers connected to it. Since the ocean is the biggest natural resource the Earth has, does common sense not denote we pay attention to it more than anything else? Studies actually show, overfishing is actually killing more of them than pollution. Though 80 percent of statistics are wrong. Are either of us intelligent enough or resourceful to discern the truth? I agree we should take responsibility for the negative impact of climate change, because we should responsibly conduct ourselves in a manner that respects our environment. Like more prevalent recycling bins, (as seen in Japan) restrictions on landfills, replacing industries dependent on lumber that need not be (I.e., paper.) leading to forest conservation, sewage management, clean water, and especially clean energy. Unfortunately, we will get no where by pointing fingers, at "conservatives," or "liberals," if you care, keep your agenda out of it and make a positive example. Your rhetoric divides people. I'm not attacking you, I'm telling you this data has been sullied due to the propaganda of both sides. The sad fact is, I don't think clashing agendas and "higher taxes," are the main cause of people caring... Except for a few millionaire/billionaires exploiting the environment for financial gain. Yes, those people are evil bastards. But, compare *their* damage to the damages caused by those suffering from poverty. It is an exponential difference. To fix the environment we have to give the majority incentive, and that requires fixing poverty. Again, I'm not saying "blame poor people." I'm saying, give them alternatives. The majority require fossil fuel emissions to make it to work. To barely survive. Most of us have terrible local waste management. Factories that produce what we need at the most cost effective margin to *literally provide food for our children.* This is such a nuanced issue, and I agree with you on it, in principle. Just not on the "conservative/liberal" part. Add your ego to an argument, you've already fell on the sword of your hubris. Look at the facts, find solutions. I hope one day we can both say we did more positive than negative for the environment, in order to do that we have to work together. I'm from the poorest state in my country. People without our issues do not care about us. People in California don't give a *literal shit* about us. We are too big, and all have our own problems. There is no incentive, there is no change, there is only routine and poverty. It starts with a change in attitude. You could argue the systems in place governing the decisions regarding the environment are corrupt, and it is sound. I could argue the EPA stripping us of the coal industry in our state and raising unemployment by 25% is corrupt. It is also sound, when you see people starve and literally commit suicide from losing their active lives. No one wants to die. We all want a better Earth, but if you have to fight for your next meal, you will wade through knee high fossil fuels knocking down every tree in your way to feed you and your family. Liberalism is a beautiful thing, we are supposed to understand everyone. Let's not make such a beautiful, simple vision, a bitter pill to swallow. People are in pain.
Not going to lie the conversation at 9:30 reminded me of one of my theories that we are all from a plant or fungus (because our cells are evolutionarily closer to fungi cells and it took forever for fungus to split off of plants but quickly mutated to animal cells in retrospect).
I want to watch an interview with a brilliant terraforming expert reference terraforming the unused, non-productive deserts of earth. Also, populating the Antarctic continent. Why can’t we make OUR Earth a garden of eden? More plants = more food = better nutrition world-wide = a more intelligent Human populous. Happy people with plenty of square feet of living space & full stomachs makes a better world.
Ants build hill, bee make hive, spiders weave web, humans build civilization..this is nature. Our society will never end. We will just continue to build new layers on top. That's why archaeologists dig. 🕵️
I could listen to this man speak for hours. Incredible insight. He cuts through all the bullshit! Really makes you think about how we are on a runaway train and the breaks are gone. For the most part people alive today really don't care about what they leave behind for the next generation.
What is there to live for? Did you not understand THE Question? There is no future for us all! For some of our children's children, there might still be a planet to breath, eat, sleep, and repeat, but not in the way WE( that means YOU TO) are flooding this globe with off-spring! It does not matter what kind of 'solution' we try out next. Not even this stupid anti-greenhouse rules and implements government today are turning to, it will not do. If we would say: hey, let us shrink down this mass population to 1billion total... then... perhaps. Now you make the decision to get rid off 7billion other people. What is your solution? Covid20? Covid21?
"It's possible that we aren't the most intelligent species on the planet...the reasons lion's have bigger brains than gazelles may not be because it takes more brain cells to chase as a lion than run away from one but, because the lions may have to perform more complex computations to ensure they don't exhaust their entire food source"... I don't say this often - I really don't - but Joscha Bach is possibly the smartest guy I've ever heard on RU-vid. Who even thinks like this?!
We certainly aren't the strongest that's for sure. A bear or a shark can easily eat us. And that covers most of the environments humans are in. Hell, a rottweiler can easily take someone down and they're in our houses. And dude, lions don't "manage their stock" lol They run on instinct OS. They only chase gazelles when they're hungry. And if it isn't gazelles, it's zebras and so on. The amount of energy they spend chasing them is enough so that they don't it often. Also the birth rate for herbivores is higher than carnivores because they're not that aggressive during coupling. A lioness can bite a head off if someone does something that they don't like. If humans weren't smarter than all the animals we probably wouldn't be here. The dumber you are the easier it is to die. But one the things I find must ironic in life is that dumb animals live closer to the 'real world' rather than intelligent humans. Because they don't have to resort to constructs to shape a reality that fits them. We don't need money, we don't need computers, we don't need a lot of artificial crap! It's all madness that people somehow believe in... And follow blindly. And living close to madness causes pain and grieve and allll that negative shit. Ever lived with someone that is clinically mad?? Yeah, it's not fun because they drag you into their madness also
@@Trip4man Yes! And it has been said by mental health professionals that the human animal is the most irrational of all! One example of this is people metaphorically following the stupid off a cliff.
I've thought about native american civilizations and how they still persist 4 centuries on, similar to how the Amish live. They grow what they need from the Earth to survive, they have strong communities & responsibilities to their communities, and they do not pollute the Earth like the rest of us do, almost like taking a vow of poverty. Without materialism there is no diversified economy, but makes me wonder if those communities are wiser because they will survive.
Homie roughly said without missing a beat " An efficient government is a mechanism that allows you to align your Nash equilibrium to the rest of society." Effortless Brilliance.
Who has time for Social Media? I workout daily, cook fresh, keep track of investments; I do not have a maid. Any remaining time is for Lex and other favorites!
Dude definitely brought up some very strong points. In spite of the huge set of problems before us I still find myself very optimistic. We havnt burned 100 million years of trees yet and the sun wont stop shining for a few more years. I think this idea of the entropic abyss to be overblown and tractable. 2. We should not discount the power of compounding improvement or leveraged gains. 3. Nonlinear effects of our actions on the environment are definitely scary. It's like running blind at full tilt right off the edge of a cliff. We cant model rare events or super complex phenomena accurately but we also fall in love with our models and this makes us arrogant. It is also partly why we hate the empirical wisdom of tribal people; we believe having a reason why is more important than if it works. Non linear effects are terrifying. 4. Trees may be smart, perhaps smarter than us lol and they may outlast us, but trees will never be the shepherds of earth's life to new planets. We hold a particular power that no other life form possesses. 5. The obvious damage humans have had on the biosphere is reversible. This is a hugely difficult problem since it is a subset of nonlinear effect phenomena and also a commons problem under the purview of government and a problem of foresight that will be magnitudes greater than the term limits. Nevertheless it is in all likelihood a problem we can solve. Considering the timescales bioms existed evolving free of modern humans it is likely to look much worse before it gets better. But nature itself is subject to our purview. No matter what lex thinks is desirable about being in nature most people would agree we should have killed most of the wolves bears and cats that roamed north America. It is all together unclear if humans as fragile as we currently are would be willing to live in an untamed wilderness. More over what this means for the project of revitalizing the biosphere. 5. As chemistry continues to improve so will the complexity of chemicals we can produce until finally our designs will rival life itself and replace life if we desire. Such nano machines will be a foundational tool in the solutions for many of the problems we are currently so worried about. 6. Humans can be made more resilient to the stressors of heat and scarcity. Seems like these practices also improve health span. 7. Governance and community is a super hard aspect of many problems. Implementation of a solution to a commons problem or a problem with several actors is 90% of the problem. Fucking hard to do but possible. This part is super undervalued and also filled with bright eyed naivete. 8. The evolution of materials will yield more renewable materials. Energy usage, material useage will only increase if we are successful as a species. Ai will do nothing to lower our energy expenditure. If it lowers cost of energy or increases energy efficiency it will increase gross energy expenditure. Ai is a tool that would facilitate many innovations in tech and science and perhaps even governance and sociology but it is no panacea. 9. Has our technology flatlined? Has it really slowed since the 70s? I doubt it. In a world of GUI like tools it becomes difficult for a layman to appreciate the advances in technology. We are like the frog being boiled slowly; ow and we also dont realize they are using induction cooktop lol. 10. Beauty doesn't mean something is good lex lol
Civilization as we are currently experiencing and living within it may well be on thin ice but I think because of the struggle for money and power this is the main cause created by a very small percentage of the population.
I'm going to slightly disagree with this statement that technology is stagnating, at least in so far as computer science is concerned. In that respect he's overlooking a fundamental fact, namely that computer science is a subfield of mathematics. Saying cs is stagnating, because someone from the 70s could just appear, read one book and understand everything happening today is as saying mathematics is stagnating, because someone from the 1900s could reappear, read one book and understand everything happening today in mathematics. That is how it's supposed to be. The whole point of basically any subfield of mathematics is to not only discover new things, but to make their derivations from the starting points, i.e. axioms, as succinct and elegant as possible so that everyone is able to accept state-of-the-art results by being able to verify for themselves how they have been derived from the fundamentals. It wouldn't make sense to come up with 10000 alternatives for the Turing Machine or Von Neumann architecture, because these models are already universal and practical. Rather, it really only makes sense to come up with as many interesting results and applications that build on top of these foundations. Just as how in math more generally, set theory is already sufficient to build most of modern mathematics on top of. Maybe, just maybe, it might be useful to reconsider such a foundation with some competing idea such as homotopy type theory; but then the idea definitely is not to have constant innovation but to actually have an even more solid base that you can then reliably build on. More specifically, the whole point of computer science is to solve hard problems so that they never have to be solved again. Think libraries and automatisation. CS is actually the sole source of innovation right now/eating the world, and, I would argue, the most disruptive kind of innovation we have ever had, that hopefully will re-enable other sectors of the economy that actually have stagnated in the mean time. I think this is what Lex was trying to get at. I think Joscha was trying to overgeneralise a different argument that I actually do agree with, namely that the physics-based disciplines of engineering have stagnated in this period. But the problem there is more of a political and economic one as the US and other Western countries have grown increasingly bureaucratic and become economically less and less free, which is most harmful for manufacturing businesses that have to take on a lot of risk up-front, with capital mostly tied up in physical equipment. Software businesses have it a lot easier in that sense, as their investments mostly consists of human capital consisting of software engineers with which it is easier to pivot in new directions in the face of new regulations.
Human history was written before the universe was created. The limits of phyics were encoded to produce the current civilization.The human race is under the delusion of self determination in order to manifest the true nature of the creator.
Concerning actually measuring technology stagnation (or lack of thereof), I see one simple, rational test - rate of GDP per capita growth. (assuming that discoveries matter, their implementation should be visible in economic data): Executive summary - after adjusting for noise, on global level there is a clear unimpeded constant growth since '50s. However, one could argue that the most developed countries started to clearly slow down in last decades, what implies that technological frontier is moving slower than it used, while achievements are done by late adopters. ourworldindata.org/economic-growth#historical-reconstructions-of-national-accounts-the-case-of-the-uk
This idea that hunter gatherers are not also destroying the environment is quite idealized and unrealistic. They often harvest honey by starting forest fires, for example.
It would be wonderful to hear this man flesh out his thoughts on our demise and join in a conversation with someone who could produce more friction than lex's counters. I did enjoy listening nevertheless.
I think he's just being polite to his host, since Lex is a proponent of technological solutions and AI. He seems to divert when asked whether technology will help curb the problem, which implies that he doesn't think so. I would agree. If we look at our past more technology and automation almost always leads to increased consumption. There's no reason to think that better gadgets will somehow rewire the human brain to be more restrained.
@@PreschoolDropout673 it was surprising to me how Lex reacted to growth problem, I did not expected such reaction at all. I felt like he wanted to say something and then realized he has contradict thought.
see the paper from berkeley that details the growth of tomato plants whilst listening to classical music, they grew larger. what probably was happening, was a paticular field was externally applied to the plants which led to greater growth... but the correlation was made to the music
I don't believe it's starting again per se, but pushing beyond into a technology led green revolution. Harnessing "technology" to create synergy with the superorganism we are part of. It is true that since the first cell formed on Earth, it has never failed to replicate. In that sense we are all a single superorganism, with all the species we see on Earth today merely complex iterations of the original, much like the various cells in a body. In a biological sense our species is behaving as a cancer on Earth, both our resource consumption and destruction of other genetic diversity in the process, not to mention perturbing the very conditions conducive to life on Earth.
Every clip of Joscha is a glimpse of hope that we are brilliant enough to realize we fucked up and have to change our incentive structures if we want to stay on this spinning Hal!
I have questioned our existence a few times, but in those times I didnt have the spiritual understanding and appreciation of others/consciousness, so I learned our mind have habits of extreme thoughts and non mindfulness, so my view changed from dread and nightmare to understanding and growth and so I learned if you want big dreams you need a good perspective and also I learned to be positive and be kind even in the bad times.
Being in the dark cold wet forest surrounded by unsubdued nature has been the greatest joy of my life, tracking wolves to grow my skill set but being unarmed. Maybe it’s uncomfortable or unpleasant as he says; but I mourn all humans who think that it’s something they can’t enjoy.
Hilarious, Joshua Bach: Twitter in some sense is like a global brain that is completely hooked on dopamine, doesn't have any kind of inhibition, and as a result of is caught in a permanent seizure.
18:50 - that humor is a great addition to the science world. This is what Neil Postman wrote about in his books. Our attention span is very short today and the miss the essential things.
A lack of corporately owned agricultural technology does not cause hunger any more than a lack of aspirin causes headaches. Poor wages, trade policies that dump foreign agricultural products into the market undercutting farm prices, and government policy that pushes small farmers off their land-these are the causes of hunger. So, let’s get this straight, we don’t need to feed the world. The indigenous farmers of the world have been around longer than the US farmer has, in many ways they taught us how to feed ourselves. They do not want to eat what corporate agribusiness wants to feed them, they want culturally appropriate diets that are healthy and adapted to their farms-and that is clearly more important than corporate profit. Politically, “feeding the world” is a reason to control the world-so the world, especially the poor, will fit neatly into the equation for ever-growing corporate profit. Because increasingly it seems, ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````corporate profit is all that matters politically.
George Carlin said in a bit something along the lines of, 'Save the Earth!? The Earth doesn't need saved; it'll brush us off and be just fine.' We should think of environmental and social reform as saving ourselves. The best point here is we are VERY short-sighted. Like they said about Mars. The worst Earth is better than the best Mars... And you wanna spend trillions to go there??
@@fishfire_2999 I agree. I fear Bach doesn't understand the danger of efficient government combined with utopian ideas. Friction is something that keeps the government in check and enables a certain degree of freedom (even in totalitarian countries)
Honestly when I smoke a good one every once in a while. My mind and thoughts are racing and I come up with the same type of abstract / high level thinking like this guy
As I keep saying, one has to go and smoke DMT in the woods to fully understand that we are just a momentary blip in time. Trees and plants have been here the longest and operate on a completely different time scale to us.
@@davidwilliams7552 It surely will fail... You should see what Qatar is doing to prepare for global warming... Accelerated entropy warming your climate up? No problem, accelerate entropy further to cool down. It's actually a huge concern for middle eastern cities though, you should look into it...
The Canadian philosopher George Grant (obit 1998) wrote profoundly on “technique as the theology of liberalism” (see the Introduction to his “Philosophy in the Mass Age”, 1966). He traces, following Jacques Ellul the unfolding of technology and how, as Gideon earlier noted “ mechanisation takes command.” The only way out of this is overcoming the siloisation of contemporary schooling to comprehend a holistic account of life on this planet.
