Many Minds

Welcome back folks! The new season of Many Minds is quickly ramping up. On today's episode we're thrilled to be rejoined by Dr. Michael Muthukrishna. Michael is Associate Professor of Economic Psychology at the London School of Economics. He's an unusually wide-ranging and rigorous thinker; though still early in his career, Michael has already made key contributions to our understanding of culture, intelligence, evolution, innovation, cooperation and corruption, cross-cultural variation, and a bunch of other areas as well.  We wanted to have Michael back on—not just because he was an audience favorite—but because he's got a new book out. It's titled A theory of everyone: The new science of who we are, how we got here, and where we're going. In this conversation, Michael and I talk about the book and lay out that grand theory mentioned in the title. We discuss energy and how—since the very origins of life—it's proven to be a fundamental, unshakeable constraint. We talk about the nature of human intelligence and consider the dynamics of human cooperation and innovation. We also delve into a few of the implications that Michael's "theory of everyone" has for the future of our species. Along the way, we touch on carrying capacity, nuclear fusion, inclusive fitness, religion, the number line, multiculturalism, AI, the Flynn effect, and chaos in the brickyard.  If you enjoy this one, you may want to go back to listen to our earlier chat as well. But more importantly, you may want to get your hands on Michael's book. It's ambitious and inspiring and we were barely able to graze it here.  Alright friends, without further ado, on to my second conversation with Dr. Michael Muthukrishna. Enjoy!    A transcript of this episode is available here.   Notes and links 8:30 – Dr. Muthukrishna completed his PhD at the University of British Columbia, where he was advised by Joseph Henrich. He also worked with Ara Norenzayan, Steven Heine, and others.   9:30 – Previous books on dual-inheritance theory and cultural evolution mentioned here include The Secret of Our Success by Joseph Henrich, Not by Genes Alone by Peter Richerson and Robert Boyd, and Darwin's Unfinished Symphony by Kevin Lala. 16:30 – Dr. Muthukrishna's paper on the theory problem in psychology, drawn from his dissertation. 17:10 – The classic paper 'Chaos in the Brickyard,' about the need for theory-building in science. 22:00 – For a brief overview of Dr. Muthukrishna's understanding of human intelligence and human uniqueness, see this recent paper. For an overview of cumulative culture in comparative perspective, see here.  23:00 – For the 2005 issue of Science magazine showcasing 25 big unanswered questions, see here.  23:30 – For the review paper on cooperation by Dr. Muthukrishna and Dr. Henrich, see here.  26:00 – For Dr. Muthukrishna's empirical work that attempts to induce corruption in the lab, see here. 28:00 – The scholar Robert Klitgaard, mentioned here, is well-known for his research on corruption.   29:00 – See the preprint by Dr. Muthukrishna and colleagues titled 'The size of the stag determines the level of cooperation.' 33:30 – A video laying out the RNA world hypothesis. 45:00 – For more on the evolution of human brain size, see our earlier conversation with Dr. Muthukrishna, as well as our conversation with Jeremy DeSilva. 47:00 – For the metric known as Energy Return on Investment (EROI), see here. 54:00 – For more on the cross-cultural variation in numeracy, see here. 55:20 – To correct the record, according to this review of rare numeral systems, there is only a single known base 8 system in the world's languages. 57:15 – In our earlier conversation (around 42:00), we discussed the work by Luria on 'If P, then Q' reasoning.  57:30 – For more on the so-called WEIRD problem, see our earlier audio essay. 1:00:30 – For some experimental evidence consistent with the idea that language improves the transmission of cultural information, see here. 1:07:00 – For data on the acceleration of urbanization, see here. 1:16:00 – For a brief primer on land value taxes, see here. 1:18:30 – For the idea that Machiavelli's The Prince was satire, see here.   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com.  For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Whales and dolphins are, without a doubt, some of the most charismatic, enigmatic creatures around. Part of what draws us to them is that­—different as our worlds are from theirs, different as our bodies are—we sense a certain kinship. We know they've got big brains, much like we do. We know that some cetacean species live long lives, sing songs, and form close bonds. If you're like me, you may have also wondered about other parallels. For example, do whales and dolphins have something we might want to call culture? If so, what do those cultures look like? What sorts of traditions might these animals be innovating and circulating down in the depths? On this week's episode I chatted with Dr. Luke Rendell, a Reader in the School of Biology and a member of the Sea Mammal Research Unit at the University of St Andrews in Scotland. He's been studying cetaceans for more than two decades. He's the author, with Hal Whitehead, of the 2014 book The Cultural Lives of Whales and Dolphins. (You can probably guess by the book's title where Luke comes down on the question of cetacean culture.) Luke's work is, to my mind, an impressive blend of naturalistic observation, cutting edge methods, and big-picture theorizing. In this conversation, Luke and I do a bit of "Cetaceans 101." We talk about what culture is and why whale song is a good example of it. We discuss lob-tail feeding in humpback whales and tail-walking in bottlenose dolphins. We talk about Luke's very recent work on how sperm whales in the 19th century may have learned from each other how to evade whalers. And we discuss why an understanding of culture may be crucial for ongoing cetacean conservation efforts. We didn't plumb all the depths of this rich topic—nor did we exhaust all the maritime puns—but we did have a far-reaching chat about some of the most fascinating beings on our planet and their distinctive cultures. As always, thanks a bunch for listening folks. On to my conversation with Dr. Luke Rendell. Enjoy!   A transcript of this episode is available here.    Notes and links 2:30 – My favorite edition of Moby Dick (for what it's worth). 6:45 – A primer on cetaceans. 9:30 – A paper on the ins and outs of the whale nose. 10:45 – A general audience article about echolocation in cetaceans, drawing on this recent academic article. 12:30 ­– A discussion of Roger Payne's storied whale song album. 19:00 – A paper on cetacean brain and body size. 19:45 – Dr. Rendell's 2001 article in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, co-authored with Hal Whitehead. The paper made a splash. 24:50 – A paper by Dr. Rendell and colleagues describing some of his work on whale song. 26:40 – The 2000 paper by Michael Noad and colleagues, presenting some of compelling early evidence for whale song as a culturally transmitted phenomenon. 28:30 – A subsequent paper by Ellen Garland, Michael Noad, and colleagues showing further evidence for the socially transmitted nature of song. 31:45 – Dr. Rendell has also done important theoretical work on social learning strategies. See, for instance, here and here. 33:24 – An article offering evidence of imitation in killer whales. 36:10 – The paper by Dr. Rendell and colleagues on lob-tail feeding in humpback whales. 36:35 – A video illustrating "bubble net feeding." 47:45 – The paper by Dr. Rendell and colleagues on tail-walking in dolphins. 55:30 – The paper by Dr. Rendell and colleagues on 19th century sperm whales' evasion tactics, as well as a popular piece on the same. 57:00 – A website documenting various aspects of whaling history. 1:05:00 – A recent discussion of gene-culture co-evolution across animal species. 1:10:00 – A recent paper by Dr. Rendell and (many) colleagues about how an appreciation of animal culture offers important lessons for conservation.   Dr. Rendell's end of show recommendations: Dolphin Politics in Shark Bay, by Richard Connor Deep Thinkers, edited by Janet Mann The Wayfinders, by Wade Davis You can keep up with Dr. Rendell on Twitter (@_lrendell).   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://disi.org), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, visit our website (https://disi.org/manyminds/), or follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Have you ever seen what seemed to be a spirit? Or heard a voice from an unseen source? Or maybe just sensed a presence and found yourself with goosebumps all over? These kinds of experiences can be incredibly powerful— life-altering, in fact—but they don't happen often, and they don't happen to everyone. So what drives this individual variation? Why do some of us have these extraordinary experiences while others never do? Could it be something about our personalities? Or our cultures? Could it have to do with the way we understand our minds? My guests on today's show are Tanya Luhrmann, Professor of Anthropology at Stanford University, and Kara Weisman, a postdoc at UC-Riverside (formerly in the Psychology department at Stanford). Along with nine collaborators from across institutions, Tanya and Kara recently published a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences (PNAS) titled 'Sensing the presence of gods and spirits across cultures and faiths.' This episode is nominally in our "behind the paper" series, but really it tells the story of not just this one paper but a much larger project: The Mind and Spirit project. The project was an unusual effort in scope: it included anthropologists and psychologists; it involved fieldwork in Ghana, Thailand, China, Vanuatu, and the US and practitioners of different faith traditions; it used both in-depth interviews and large-scale survey testing with thousands of participants. The particular paper we're discussing today probed the basic idea that so-called "spiritual presence events"—those tingly, jarring, extraordinary experiences that some of us have—could be due to two main factors, factors that vary across individuals and cultures. The first proposed factor is how people understand the mind-world boundary. People who conceive of the mind as fundamentally leaky or "porous" might be more likely to have these kinds of experiences. The second proposed factor is how likely people are to get absorbed in their sensory experiences, to lose themselves in music, art, nature, movies, and so on. In our conversation, Tanya, Kara, and I talk about the deeper history behind this work; we break down what the constructs of porosity and absorption mean exactly and how they chose to measure them; we discuss the challenges and rewards of cross-disciplinary collaboration; and we talk about why I really need to read more William James. I wanted to feature this paper the moment I learned about it—it's such an impressive piece of research on several levels. It's also just certifiably cool. It's dealing with cultural differences. It's dealing with individual differences. And it's dealing with variability in, to use the authors' words "something as basic as what feels real to the senses." So let's get to it. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Dr. Tanya Luhrmann and Dr. Kara Weisman. Enjoy! The paper we discuss is here. A transcript of this show is available here.   Notes and links 4:00 – Dr. Luhrmann's first book was based on work with British practitioners of magic and witchcraft. 5:30 – Another of Dr. Luhrmann's books looked at American Evangelicals and their relationship to God. 6:30 – A paper by Marcia Johnson and Carol Raye on "reality monitoring." 12:45 – In earlier work, Dr. Weisman examined people's conceptions of mind and mental life. 16:37 – One of the other collaborators on the Mind and Spirit project is Felicity Aulino. 19:30 – More info about Tellegen's absorption scale can be found here and here. 28:05 – Another member of the project is Rachel E. Smith. 33:24 – Another member of the project is Cristine Legare, former guest on Many Minds (!). 36:00 – Another member of the project is John Dulin. 42:00 – Another member of the project is Emily Ng. 42:30 – Another member of the project is Joshua D. Brahinsky. 43:00 – Another member of the project is Vivian Dzokoto. 58:00 – Dr. Luhrmann discusses the "citadel" model of the mind in her more recent book, How God Becomes Real. 59:20 – Dr. Weisman is currently part of a new large-scale project, the Developing Belief Network.   Dr. Luhrmann's end-of-show recommendation: Religious Experience Reconsidered, by Ann Taves Dr. Weisman's end-of-show recommendation: The Varieties of Religious Experience, by William James   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://disi.org), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, visit our NEW website (https://disi.org/manyminds/), or follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Welcome back folks! Don't want to get ahead of ourselves, but rumor is that in certain parts of the Northern Hemisphere, the signs of spring are starting to emerge—little buds and shocks of color. We'll be monitoring the situation closely over the coming weeks. My guest today is Melanie Challenger. Melanie is a writer and researcher whose work explores the relationship between humans and the natural world. The subject of our conversation is her latest book, How to be Animal: A New History of What it Means to Be Human. In it, she confronts our species' epic struggle with our animal nature. We have this tendency to see ourselves as above and beyond the natural order, as possessing something special, something extraordinary that sets us apart. And yet it's no secret that we are also biological organisms, made from the same stuff as the rest of the animal kingdom and bound by the same laws and limits. You can sense the struggle; you can probably feel the tension. Through the lens of this struggle, Melanie's book takes in a huge sweep of terrain. It considers our tendency to dehumanize other humans and "dementalize" animals; it discusses our alienation from our own bodies; it takes up our desire to colonize space and upload our minds so they survive our death. That's not all. It also zooms in on paleolithic cave art, neuro-essentialism, the notions of personhood and dignity, not to mention mass extinction and machine intelligence and a whole lot else. It's a provocative book and a brave book, and chatting with Melanie about it was a real treat. An announcement, or re-announcement, I suppose: Applications for the 2021 Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute are now open. Check out our amazing faculty (including some former guests of the show) and find further details at disi.org. I'll just mention here that Melanie and I first met at the 2020 institute—she was one of our Storytellers. So, you know, more evidence that cool people who think about cool things are to be found at DISI. Alright folks—hope you enjoy this one. And, if you do, definitely pick up Melanie's book. It'll be out Tuesday, March 23 in the US.   A transcript of this show is available here.   Notes and links 9:24 – "Substance dualism" is one of several forms of dualism. See here. 12:30 – A primer on elephant cognition. 18:00 – One of the works on dehumanization that Challenger discusses in her book is Less than Human by David Livingstone Smith. The topic is also discussed at length in a book we featured in December, Survival of the Friendliest, by Brian Hare & Vanessa Woods. 21:30 – A recent review of the wide literature on "terror management theory." 25:50 – An article reviewing work on "mental time travel," which Challenger views as one of our key capacities as humans. 30:46 – A study by Amy Fitzgerald and colleagues on crime rates in the proximity of slaughterhouses. 33:50 – The Cave of Altamira in Spain. 38:30 – Here we discuss the work of researcher Kim Hill. 45:50 – John Locke's An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, published in 1690, can be read here. 53:57 – See Challenger's previous book about extinction. 55:45 – Read about the 2009 Copenhagen accord here.   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://disi.org), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, visit our NEW website (https://disi.org/manyminds/), or follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Guess what folks: we are celebrating a birthday this week. That's right, Many Minds has reached the ripe age of one year old. Not sure how old that is in podcast years, exactly, but it's definitely a landmark that we're proud of. Please no gifts, but, as always, you're encouraged to share the show with a friend, write a review, or give us a shout out on social. To help mark this milestone we've got a great episode for you. My guest is the writer, Brian Christian. Brian is a visiting scholar at the University of California Berkeley and the author of three widely acclaimed books: The Most Human Human, published in 2011; Algorithms To Live By, co-authored with Tom Griffiths and published in 2016; and most recently, The Alignment Problem. It was published this past fall and it's the focus of our conversation in this episode. The alignment problem, put simply, is the problem of building artificial intelligences—machine learning systems, for instance—that do what we want them to do, that both reflect and further our values. This is harder to do than you might think, and it's more important than ever. As Brian and I discuss, machine learning is becoming increasingly pervasive in everyday life—though it's sometimes invisible. It's working in the background every time we snap a photo or hop on Facebook. Companies are using it to sift resumes; courts are using it to make parole decisions. We are already trusting these systems with a bunch of important tasks, in other words. And as we rely on them in more and more domains, the alignment problem will only become that much more pressing. In the course of laying out this problem, Brian's book also offers a captivating history of machine learning and AI. Since their very beginnings, these fields have been formed through interaction with philosophy, psychology, mathematics, and neuroscience. Brian traces these interactions in fascinating detail—and brings them right up to the present moment. As he describes, machine learning today is not only informed by the latest advances in the cognitive sciences, it's also propelling those advances. This is a wide-ranging and illuminating conversation folks. And, if I may say so, it's also an important one. Brian makes a compelling case, I think, that the alignment problem is one of the defining issues of our age. And he writes about it—and talks about it here—with such clarity and insight. I hope you enjoy this one. And, if you do, be sure to check out Brian's book. Happy birthday to us—and on to my conversation with Brian Christian. Enjoy!   A transcript of this show is available here.   Notes and links 7:26 - Norbert Wiener's article from 1960, 'Some moral and technical consequences of automation'. 8:35 - 'The Sorcerer's Apprentice' is an episode from the animated film, Fantasia (1940). Before that, it was a poem by Goethe. 13:00 - A well-known incident in which Google's nascent auto-tagging function went terribly awry. 13:30 - The 'Labeled Faces in the Wild' database can be viewed here. 18:35 - A groundbreaking article in ProPublica on the biases inherent in the Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS) tool. 25:00 – The website of the Future of Humanity Institute, mentioned in several places, is here. 25:55 - For an account of the collaboration between Walter Pitts and Warren McCulloch, see here. 29:35- An article about the racial biases built into photographic film technology in the 20th century. 31:45 - The much-investigated Tempe crash involving a driverless car and a pedestrian: 37:17 - The psychologist Edward Thorndike developed the "law of effect." Here is one of his papers on the law. 44:40 - A highly influential 2015 paper in Nature in which a deep-Q network was able to surpass human performance on a number of classic Atari games, and yet not score a single point on 'Montezuma's Revenge.' 47:38 - A chapter on the classic "preferential looking" paradigm in developmental psychology: 53:40 - A blog post discussing the relationship between dopamine in the brain and temporal difference learning. Here is the paper in Science in which this relationship was first articulated. 1:00:00 - A paper on the concept of "coherent extrapolated volition." 1:01:40 - An article on the notion of "iterated distillation and amplification." 1:10:15 - The fourth edition of a seminal textbook by Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig, AI a Modern approach, is available here: http://aima.cs.berkeley.edu/ 1:13:00 - An article on Warren McCulloch's poetry. 1:17:45 - The concept of "reductions" is central in computer science and mathematics.   Brian Christian's end-of-show reading recommendations: The Alignment Newsletter, written by Rohin Shah Invisible Women, by Caroline Criado Perez: The Gardener and the Carpenter, Alison Gopnik: You can keep up with Brian at his personal website or on Twitter.   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://www.diverseintelligencessummer.com/), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Greetings friends and happy February! Today's episode is a conversation with Dr. Michael Muthukrishna, an Associate Professor of Economic Psychology at the London School of Economics. Michael's research takes on a suite of topics that all start from a single big question: Why are we so different from other animals? Part of the answer has to do with our neural hardware. There's no question we've got big brains—and Michael has some cool things to say about why they may have gotten so big. But Michael is just as focused on our cultural software—the tools and ideas we develop, tweak, share, and accumulate over time. You might say he's more impressed by our collective brains than by our individual brains. To study all this, Michael builds formal theories and computational models; he runs experiments; and he constructs and analyzes huge databases. We cover a lot of ground in this episode. We talk about the finding that the size and interconnectedness of a social group affects the cultural skills that group can develop and maintain. We consider what actually powers innovation (hint: it's not lone geniuses). We discuss how diversity is a bit double-edged and why psychology needs to become a historical science. And that, my friends, is hardly all—we also touch on cetaceans, religious history, and spinning plates. I've been hoping to have Michael on the show for months now. His work is deeply theoretical, advancing the basic science of what it means to be human. But it's also engaged with important practical issues—issues like corruption and cultural diversity. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Dr. Michael Muthukrishna. Enjoy! A transcript of this show is available here.   Notes and links 4:30 - An introduction to "dual inheritance theory." 11:00 - A 2013 paper by Dr. Muthukrishna and colleagues about the relationship between sociality and cultural complexity. 12:15 - A paper on the loss of cultural tools and traditions in the Tasmanian case. 21:20 – A 2016 paper by Dr. Muthukrishna and Joseph Henrich on innovation and the collective brain. 28:30 - The original paper on the notion of cultural "tightness" and "looseness." 30:20 - A recent short piece by Dr. Muthukrishna on the paradox of diversity. 34:50 - A 2019 popular piece of mine on the phenomenon of "global WEIRDing." 40:27 - The so-called Flynn Effect refers to the puzzling rise of IQ scores over time. It is named after James Flynn, who died only weeks ago. 42:30 - A paper about the significance of Luria's work on abstract reasoning in Uzbekistan. 50:26 - A paper on the "cultural brain hypothesis," the subject of Dr. Muthukrishna's dissertation. 51:00 - A paper on brains as fundamentally "expensive." 58:00 - Boyd & Richardson, mentioned here, have authored a number of highly influential books. The first of these was Culture and the Evolutionary Process. 59:35 - A 2015 paper on head size and emergency birth interventions. 1:01:20 - The stylized model we mention here is discussed and illustrated in this lecture from the 2020 Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute. 1:03:15 – The paper by Dr. Muthukrishna and colleagues on cetacean brains and culture. 1:11:38 - The paper by Dr. Muthukrishna and colleagues on 'Psychology as a Historical Science.' 1:14:00 - The 2020 paper by Dr. Muthukrishna and colleagues introducing a tool for the measurement of cultural distance. 1:20:20 – Dr. Muthukrishna is part of the team behind the Database of Religious History. 1:24:25 - The paper by Dr. Muthukrishna and Joe Henrich on 'The Origins and Psychology of Human Cooperation.'   Dr. Muthukrishna's end-of-show reading recommendations: Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success & The WEIRDest People in the World Matt Ridley, How Innovation Works Matthew Syed, Rebel Ideas  You can keep up with Dr. Muthukrishna's work at his personal website and on Twitter (@mmuthukrishna).   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://www.diverseintelligencessummer.com/), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Today we've got another "behind the paper" episode for you. In it, we're talking about some of the most alien-seeming yet charismatic creatures around. I chatted with Dr. Alex Schnell, a Comparative Psychologist and Research Fellow at Cambridge University. We discuss a paper she recently published with a few colleagues titled, 'How intelligent is a cephalopod?' I've been charmed by cephalopods for awhile now—octopuses specifically. Maybe you have too. You've probably seen those videos of octopuses carrying coconut shells for protection, or pretending to be a hermit grab or a flounder. Maybe you saw the recent documentary My Octopus Teacher where the main octopus character gathers a bunch of shells into a kind of makeshift armor to protect herself against an imminent shark attack. This is all jaw-droppingly, head-scratchingly cool stuff. But you may have also wondered, as I have, what's really going on—cognitively— behind these behaviors. What's happening in the minds of these creatures when they pull off these fancy feats? Could the mechanisms involved actually be simpler than you might at first guess? This really is the core issue in Alex's paper and we circle around it for much of the conversation. But, in circling, we touch on a lot. We cover some Cephalopod 101 type stuff—when cephalopods split from vertebrates, what cephalopods brains are like, why octopuses tends to hog the limelight when squid and cuttlefish are pretty impressive, too. We talk about Alex's studies of self-control in cuttlefish, styled on the classic marshmallow experiments. We talk about the cephalopod gift for disguise and whether this gift might suggest a form of bodily awareness or maybe even theory of mind. And we zoom out to talk about the evolution of cognitive sophistication generally and how cephalopods can help us understand the kinds of forces that drive it. I've been excited about cephalopods for awhile now, but having this conversation made me that much more so. It's convinced me that we still have a ton to learn about—and probably from—these brainy, shape-shifting creatures. So let's get to it. Here's my conversation with Dr. Alex Schnell. Enjoy!   The paper we discuss is here. A transcript of this episode is available here.   Notes and links 14:35 – Watch a video of octopuses carrying coconuts here. See the original research study on this behavior here. 16:45 – A paper showing that Eurasian jays can think beyond their current state to consider future needs. 17:40 – The paper reporting the original pretzel experiments in human children. 29:10 – A video of an octopus purportedly changing colors while dreaming. 32:10 – Another recent paper published by Dr. Schnell, led by her colleague Piero Amodio, about the evolutionary drivers of cephalopod intelligence and animal intelligence generally. 38:20 – A recent discussion of animal sentience and the "precautionary principle."   Dr. Schnell's end-of-show reading recommendations: A recent paper by P. Billard and colleagues Recent work by Piero Amodio Research at the Cognitive Neuroethology of Cephalopods (NECC) lab You can follow Dr. Schnell at her website or on Twitter.   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://www.diverseintelligencessummer.com/), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

When you think of domestication, I bet you think of farm animals—you know cows and pigs and alpacas—or maybe house pets. You might think of corn or wheat or rice. You probably don't think of us—humans, Homo sapiens. But, by the end of today's conversation, I'm guessing you will. For this episode I talked with Dr. Brian Hare of Duke University. He's a core member of the Center for Cognitive Neuroscience there, as well a Professor of Evolutionary Anthropology. Along with Vanessa Woods, he's the author of book published this summer titled Survival of the Friendliest: Understanding our Origins and Rediscovering our Common Humanity. We talked about Brian's research with dogs, foxes, and bonobos and how it led him to a big idea at the center of this new book. The idea is that, much as we domesticated farm animals to make them tamer and easier to work with, we also seem to have domesticated ourselves at some point in our evolutionary past. This process is known as self-domestication—a selection for friendliness. But beyond making us gentler and smilier, the domestication process also had a bunch of unexpected impacts on our behaviors, bodies, and brains. Really unexpected, like the fact that we have globe-shaped heads. According to Brian and Vanessa's account, self-domestication was in fact the force that allowed ancient humans to develop larger social networks and, in turn, more sophisticated technologies. So it may hold the answer to why we're still around while other hominin species—like the Neanderthals—aren't. As Brian says at one point in our conversation, the book is really offering an account of human nature. And, importantly, it's a dual nature. Lurking behind our friendliness—co-existing and co-evolved with our newfound chumminess—is a darker side, a capacity for real cruelty. I consider the human self-domestication hypothesis to be one of the most fascinating ideas of that last decade. Right now it's really at the center of a lot of conversations about human origins and about human and animal minds. Enjoy!   A transcript of this episode is available here.   Notes and links Note: Much of what we discuss is covered in Survival of the Friendliest, but additional readings and sources are also listed here. 6:42 – Read the paper inspired by Dr. Hare's early observations about how his dog Oreo could understand human pointing gestures. 8:40 – In one study, Dr. Hare traveled to Siberia to study a population of domesticated foxes—and specifically to ask whether they would show a predilection for cooperative communication. The long-running fox-farm experiment is the subject of a book titled How to Tame a Fox (And Build a Dog). 10:50 – Around the same time as his research in Siberia, Dr. Hare also published work examining how bonobos exhibit more tolerance than chimpanzees. 15:15 – A recent article voicing skepticism about the fox-farm research and the so-called "domestication syndrome." 17:30 – See Dr. Hare's 2017 book, Bonobos: Unique in Mind, Brain, and Behavior, co-authored with Shinya Yamamato. 30:00 – A long-standing puzzle in paleoanthropology is why modern human behavior—as judged by advanced tool use, symbolism, etc.—lagged behind modern human anatomy by more than a hundred thousand years. The eventual emergence of modern behavior is sometimes described as the Upper Paleolithic Revolution. 40:00 – An article Dr. Hare published along with Robert L. Cieri, Steven Churchill, and other colleagues on the origins of "behavioral modernity." 48:30 – Steven Pinker—among other scholars—has argued that violence has declined in human societies from prehistory until today. This idea has been both influential and controversial. 58:45 – Evidence from social psychology suggests that cross-group friendships might be especially powerful in changing attitudes. Here's one paper on the power of inter-group contact.   Brian Hare's end-of-show recommendations: Richard Wrangham, The Goodness Paradox David Livingston Smith, On Inhumanity David Stasavage, The Decline and Rise of Democracy See also: books by Joseph Henrich and Michael Tomasello   The best way to keep up with Dr. Hare's work is on Twitter (@bharedogguy) website: http://brianhare.net/   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://www.diverseintelligencessummer.com/), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Welcome back folks! Today's episode is a conversation about the nature of knowledge. I talked with Dr. Briana Toole, an Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Claremont McKenna College. Briana specializes in epistemology—the branch of philosophy that grapples with all things knowledge-related. In her work she is helping develop a new framework called "standpoint epistemology." The basic idea is that what we know depends in part on our social position—on our gender, our race, and other factors. We flesh out this idea by walking through a bunch of examples that show how where we stand shapes the facts we attend to, believe, accept, and resist. We also talk about our moment present, polarized and fractured as it is. As we discuss, standpoint epistemology might offer tools to help us make sense of what's happening, understand where others are coming from, and maybe even bridge some of the chasms that divide us. Enjoy!   A transcript of this show is available here.   Notes and links 2:10 – Learn more about Dr. Toole's outreach organization, Corrupt the Youth. And for more about Dr. Toole's work with the program see this recent profile in Guernica magazine. 6:15 – Socrates was sentenced to death for corrupting the youth. 9:00 – Corrupt the Youth often begins with lessons on the allegory of the cave and the ring of Gyges. 19:50 – For more on the significance of "fake barn country," see this entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Gettier's groundbreaking paper is here. 23:00 – We mention a number of early pioneers in standpoint epistemology, including Rebecca Kukla, Sandra Harding, and Donna Haraway. 26:40 – Jane Addams's letter about women and public housekeeping. 32:20 – Dr. Toole's recent paper—'From Standpoint Epistemology to Epistemic Oppression'—discusses the distinction between marginalized and dominant knowers, among other topics. 32:55 – Kristie Dotson's classic paper on epistemic oppression. You can also listen to a podcast with her here.    37:00 – Indigenous communities in Australia have long known that certain birds spread fire in order to flush out prey. This example is discussed in Dr. Toole's article 'Demarginalizing Standpoint Epistemology.' 38:20 – We discuss three key theses in the standpoint epistemology framework: the situated knowledge thesis; the achievement thesis; and the epistemic privilege thesis. 41:10 – Read more about W.E.B. Dubois's notion of "double consciousness" here. 43:29 – The particular sense of "conceptual resources" we discuss here was introduced by Gaile Pohlhaus, and is further developed by Dr. Toole in her paper, 'From Standpoint Epistemology to Epistemic Oppression.' 44:50 – The concept of "misogynoir" is discussed here. 59:40 – The notion of "consciousness raising" has its roots feminism, as discussed here. 1:11:35 – A recent interview in The Atlantic in which former US President Barack Obama referred to our current moment as one of "epistemological crisis."   Briana Toole's end-of-show recommendations: Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center, by bell hooks Sister Outsider, by Audre Lorde Learning from the Outsider Within, Patricia Hill Collins Race and Epistemologies of Ignorance, edited by Shannon Sullivan an Nancy Tuana The best way to keep up with Dr. Toole's work is at her website: http://www.brianatoole.com/   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://www.diverseintelligencessummer.com/), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Today we've got another installment in our "behind the paper" format. In case you missed the first iteration, these are 30-minute or so interviews that dig into recent notable papers. This episode takes on a timeless question: Do concepts differ from one language to the next, or are they basically the same? Maybe you think we already know the answer. You've probably heard of cases where one language labels a concept that other languages don't—the German word schaudenfreude, or the Danish notion of hygge, or, my favorite, the Japan concept of tsundoku. These examples are fun and get a lot of attention, and they certainly make it clear that there's at least some variation. But a more provocative possibility is that even everyday words that seem easy to translate—words for concepts like chair, beautiful, or walk—might actually differ considerably from one language to the next. Today I talk to Dr. Bill Thompson, a postdoc at Princeton University in the Department of Computer Science and Dr. Gary Lupyan, a Professor at the University of Wisconsin in the Department of Psychology. Along with their co-author Sean Roberts, they published a paper this summer that looks at just this issue, at whether basic words have the same meanings across languages. The paper's title is: "Cultural influences on word meanings revealed through large-scale semantic alignment." We talk about the computational approach they use to quantify the similarity of word meanings. We consider their finding that certain kinds of concepts are more similar across languages than others. We discuss the role of culture in shaping concepts. And we talk a bit about why their paper caused something of a stir online. I found this to be a really thought-provoking conversation. It circles around one of the deepest questions we can ask about the human mind: Where do our concepts come from? Spoiler: we don't settle the question once and for all here. But we do throw some light on it—perhaps. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Dr. Bill Thompson and Dr. Gary Lupyan. Enjoy!   The paper we discuss is here. A transcript of this episode is available here.   Notes and links 9:20 – A very brief introduction to distributional semantics. A core tenet of such approaches is that "you shall know a word by the company it keeps"—as J. R. Firth famously put it. 16:00 – The Intercontinental Dictionary Series divides the words of the world's languages into 22 semantic domains. See also this blog post by Sean Roberts, in which he reports the results of a survey the authors did on how translatable people thought words from these domains would be across languages. 22:10 – The D-Place dataset is here. 27:00 – The popular write-up which, when shared on Twitter, caused a bit of a stir.   End-of-show reading recommendations: Comparing lexicons cross-linguistically, by Asifa Majid The Conceptual Mind: New Directions in the Study of Concepts, edited by Eric Margolis and Stephen Laurence Words and the Mind, edited by Barbara Malt and Phillip Wolff Does vocabulary help structure the mind? by Gary Lupyan and Martin Zettersten   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://www.diverseintelligencessummer.com/), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

You probably think you know the Neanderthals. We've all been hearing about them since we were kids, after all. They were all over the comics; they were in museum dioramas and on cartoons. They were always cast as mammoth-eating, cave-dwelling dimwits—nasty brutes, in other words. You probably also learned that they died off because they couldn't keep pace with us, Homo sapiens, their svelter, savvier superiors. That's story we had long been told anyhow. But, over the past few decades, there's been a slow-moving sea change—a revolution in how archaeologists understand our closest cousins. For this episode I talked to Dr. Rebecca Wragg Sykes about this revolution. She is a Neanderthal specialist and the author of the new book Kindred: Neanderthal Life, Love, Death and Art. Rebecca and I discuss the new picture of Neanderthals emerging from the latest archaeological research. We talk about where they lived, what they ate, the tools and clothing they made. We talk about the evidence that they had a considerable degree of cognitive sophistication and—very possibly—an aesthetic sense. Once we put all this together—and let the new picture come into focus—the gap long thought to separate them from us from them starts to close. And this makes the question of why they vanished about 40 thousand years ago all the more puzzling. I really hope you enjoy this one—I certainly did. And if you do, I definitely encourage you to check out Kindred!   A transcript of this episode is available here.   Notes and links  Most of the topics we discuss are treated in detail in Rebecca Wragg Sykes's book, Kindred. 5:40 – Earlier book-length treatments of the Neanderthals include The Smart Neanderthal and Neanderthals Revisited. 9:15 – The archaeological site of Atapuerca in Spain, which includes the Sima de los Huesos (Pit of Bones). 11:20 – The Neander Valley in Germany was the site of the very first Neanderthal find in 1856. 11:50 – Another early site was Krapina, Croatia, which is now home to a Neanderthal museum. 24:30 – A recent academic article on the complexity of Neanderthal tool use. 28:27 – A French site—La Folie—gives a sense of what some Neanderthal dwellings were like. 41:05 – A popular article about the "wow site" at Bruniquel. The original academic article. 49:16 – An article on the evidence that Neanderthals were preparing and using birch tar. 56:45 – Some evidence suggests Neanderthals were interested in bird feathers and talons. 1:01:30 – There is now evidence for repeated phases of interbreeding between human and Neanderthals. 1:05:00 – Other ancient hominin species included the Denisovans. 1:07:00 – There are some reasons to believe that pathogens carried by humans may have played a role in the demise of the Neanderthals. 1:13:30 – Another richly imaginative treatment of ancient human life is Ancestral Geographies of the Neolithic, by Mark Edmonds. To keep up with the latest Neanderthal research, Dr. Wragg Sykes recommends following archaeologists such as John Hawks (@johnhawks). She is also on Twitter (@LeMoustier) and her website is: https://www.rebeccawraggsykes.com/. Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://www.diverseintelligencessummer.com/), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Welcome back folks! Today is a return to one of our favorite formats: the audio essay. If you like your audio essays short, concise, and full of tidbits, then this mini will not disappoint. We take a look at a 140-year-old idea but very much a radical one—the root-brain hypothesis. It was proposed by Charles Darwin in a book published in the twilight of his career. The idea, in short, is that plants have a structure that is, in some ways, brain-like—and it is located underground, at their roots. We talk about how Darwin and his son Francis arrived at this idea, why it was ignored for so long, and how it's recently stirred to life. Enjoy!   A text version of this "mini" is available here.   Notes and links 2:15 – The last page of Darwin's The Power of Movement in Plants (1880). 3:25 – The 2009 paper by Dr. Baluška and colleagues about the history and modern revival of the "root-brain hypothesis." 6:00 – The tinfoil hats experiment—and its influence—is discussed in this 2009 paper. 8:00 – The dust-up between Darwin and Sachs is described in this 1996 paper. 8:47 – The 2011 paper listing many of the environmental variables plants are now known to be sensitive to. 9:28 – Dr. Gagliano and colleagues' paper on associative learning in plant and on plants' use of sounds to find water. The possibility of echolocation is discussed here. 9:45 – For broader context surrounding the question of plants may have something like a brain, see Oné R. Pagán's essay titled 'The brain: A concept in flux.' 9:57 – The 2006 paper that inaugurated the field of "plant neurobiology." 10:34 – Discussions of the "transition zone" of the root can be found in the 2009 paper by Baluška and colleagues, as well as in this more technical paper from 2010. 11:00 – The response letter to the original "plant neurobiology" paper, signed by 36 plant biologists. 12:00 – Michael Pollan's 2013 article 'The Intelligent Plant' in The New Yorker. 12:05 – Anthony Trewavas's letter, highlighting the power of metaphors in science. 12:26 – The 2020 paper about pea tendrils in Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. Correction: The audio version of this episode misstates the publication year of Darwin's final book, about worms. The correct year is 1881, not 1883.    Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://www.diverseintelligencessummer.com/), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play—or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Imagine a friend's face. How much detail do you see? Do you see the color of their hair? What about the curve of their smile? For many people, this mental image will be relatively vivid. A somewhat watered down picture, sure, but still a picture—still something similar to what they would see if that friend were sitting across from them. For other folks, though, there's no image there at all. There's just no way to will it into being. Such people have what is now known as "aphantasia"—the inability to generate visual imagery. Today I talk with Dr. Rebecca Keogh, a cognitive neuroscientist at the University of New South Wales in Australia. Dr. Keogh is one of the leading researchers in the new, fast-evolving study of aphantasia. We talk about the work she and her colleagues are doing to explore the full spectrum of individual differences in visual imagery ability, how these differences arise in the brain, and how they impact different aspects of everyday life, from how we dream, to how we envision the future, to how we respond to trauma. We also talk about folks on the other end of the spectrum—those with so-called "hyperphantasia," who experience visual images in extraordinary detail. And we get a sneak preview of some of the questions that Rebecca and her colleagues are taking on next. This episode takes us, for the first time on Many Minds, into the fascinating terrain of individual differences—into questions about how other human minds may differ from our own, often in ways that invisible and unexpected. This is terrain we definitely plan to revisit in future episodes. Had a blast with this one folks—hope you enjoy it, too!   A transcript of this episode is available here.   Notes and links  3:16 – The 2015 paper in Cortex that introduced the term "aphantasia," but the spectrum of visual imagery ability has been studied since the 1800s. 5:08 – In the 1980s Martha Farah and colleagues studied a case of acquired "aphantasia," though they didn't use the term at the time. 8:30 – The Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ) was first introduced in 1973 by David Mark. 12:15 – The 2018 paper in Cortex by Dr. Keogh and Dr. Joel Pearson. 15:15 – A 2008 paper by Dr. Pearson introducing the binocular rival method of measuring mental imagery. 23:15 – An overview of the idea of separate "what" and "where" pathways in the brain. 27:23 – The 2020 paper—'A cognitive profile of multi-sensory imagery, memory and dreaming in aphantasia'—by Alexei Dawes, Dr. Keogh, and colleagues. 41:30 – The 2020 paper by Dr. Keogh and colleagues about the role of cortical excitability in visual imagery. 44:30 – Phosphenes are a kind of visual experience that is not induced by light entering the retina. 48:15 – A primer on Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS). 51:45 – A pre-print by Marcus Wicken, Dr. Keogh, and Dr. Pearson using skin conductance to examine the level of fear experienced by aphantasic and control participants. 1:01:45 – A paper by Dr. Adam Zeman and colleagues titled 'Phantasia–The psychological significance of lifelong visual imagery vividness extremes,' which discusses vocational choices in people with extreme imagery.   Rebecca Keogh's end-of-show recommendations: Aphantasia: Experiences, Perceptions, and Insights by Alan Kendle The Cambridge Handbook of the Imagination by Anna Abraham   The best way to keep up with Dr. Keogh's work is to follow her on Twitter (@Becca_Keogh_PhD). To keep tabs on aphantasia research more broadly, you can follow other prominent aphantasia researchers such as Dr. Joel Pearson (@ProfJoelPearson) and Dr. Adam Zeman (@ZemanLab). You can also check out the Future Minds Lab and sign up for their mailing list: https://www.futuremindslab.com/.   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://www.diverseintelligencessummer.com/), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/).   You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Welcome to our 10th episode! Today's show is another in our 'mini minds' series. We've been experimenting with different formats for our minis, as you may have noticed, but today we've got another in the classic blogpost style. The topic is the acronym WEIRD—maybe you've heard it used. It stands for Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic. It's become a shorthand for the idea that people in WEIRD societies are a bit unusual relative to the rest our species. The term was first introduced 10 years ago. On this episode I talk about its origins and the far-reaching influence it's had since. As with all episodes, be sure to check out the show notes for a smorgasbord of links and tidbits. There was a lot I had to leave on the cutting room floor with this one. But I swept some of it up and put it in the notes for anyone who's interested. Enjoy!   A text version of this "mini" is readable here.    Notes and links 2:00 – The birthplace of the acronym: 'The weirdest people in the world?' 2:44 – A 2008 paper by Jeffrey Arnett that provided key support for the first part of Henrich et al.'s two-part argument. 3:35 – The visual illusion in question is the Müller-Lyer Illusion. 3:52 – These cultural differences in spatial conceptualization were first widely reported by Stephen Levinson and colleagues. See his book for the full story (or see a popular article of mine for a much shorter version). 4:33 – See the commentary by Meadon and Spurrett titled 'It's not just the subjects – there are too many WEIRD researchers.' 4:45 – See the commentary by Rozin titled 'The weirdest people in the world are a harbinger of the future of the world.' For an expansion of Rozin's argument, with more examples, see my article on "global WEIRDing". 5:45 – See David F. Lancy, The Anthropology of Childhood. (Note that only the second edition came out after the WEIRD article was published.) One part of child development that proves unexpectedly variable across cultures is learning to walk and other motor milestones. 6:30 – The intersection of smell and WEIRD-ness is discussed in a recent special issue—see the editorial introduction here. Long-standing ideas about the impoverished nature of human olfaction are discussed here. 6:48 – A study comparing olfactory sensitivity in Tsimane people and Germans. 6:55 – For discussion of the idea that odors are ineffable, see this article. The same article was also among the first to characterize the elaborated and consistently applied odor lexicon of a hunter-gatherer group. Other papers have since built on this work. 7:23 – See the paper titled 'WEIRD bodies: Mismatch, medicine, and missing diversity.' Foot flatness and flexibility in "conventionally shod" populations are discussed in this paper. 8:10 – The researchers behind the original WEIRD paper—and their students—have kept busy themselves, exploring and expanding many related themes. See papers on theodiversity, the possible influence of the Catholic Church on WEIRD psychology, and the use of a new tool for mapping degrees of cultural distance. 8:22 – For a variety of articles raising issues of sample diversity, see: the 2014 opinion piece on the exclusion of left-handers from studies in cognitive neuroscience; another piece on diversity issues in cognitive neuroscience, focusing on issues of racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic homogeneity; an article on "anglocentrism" in linguistics; and a commentary on "missing diversity" in genetics. 9:11 – For the idea that our understanding of primates may be skewed by a focus on captive primates, see 'The Mismeasure of Ape Social Cognition.' For the STRANGE framework, see here. 10:00 – For recent critiques, see here and here. The quote about the "homogeneous West" comes from the Broesch et al. (2020) paper; the quote about treating humans as "endangered butterflies" comes from Barrett (2020). Conducting research on sensitive populations is a major theme of Broesch et al. (2020). 11:15 – The analysis of persistent sampling problems in developmental psychology is here. The analysis of the journal Psychological Science is here. Patricia Bauer's editorial is here.   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://www.diverseintelligencessummer.com/), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play—or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Greetings all—and a warm welcome back for another episode! Today's show is a conversation with Daniel Oberhaus. Daniel is a staff writer for Wired magazine and the author of the book Extraterrestrial Languages, published by MIT Press in 2019. The book charts the history of humanity's efforts at "interstellar communication"—our attempts to send messages to the stars in the hopes that alien life forms might receive them. Daniel and I talk about what these messages have contained, what forms they've taken, and the thinking and theories behind them. As you might guess, the history of interstellar communication is packed full of colorful episodes, charismatic characters, and quirky passion projects. But it's also full of deep questions—questions about the very nature of communication, about the essence of human language, about why minds think in the ways they do, about the origins of mathematics, about what can and should be said on behalf of our species—or our planet. Apologies for the long list, but there really is a lot in play here—we touch on a bunch of it but for the fuller story, I definitely recommend you check out Daniel's book. Thank you so much for joining us, as always. Enjoy and take care!   A transcript of this interview is available here.   Notes and links  Most of the topics we discuss are treated in detail in Daniel Oberhaus's book, Extraterrestrial Languages. 2:38 – In 1960 the mathematician Hans Freudenthal published a book called Lincos: Design of a Language for Cosmic Intercourse. Here is Daniel's original article profiling Freudenthal and his ideas. 5:08 – There were a number of fanciful early schemes for communicating with aliens. For example, Carl Friedrich Gauss, better known for his contributions to mathematics, reportedly proposed building a large right triangle as a kind of message. 10:30 – The Arecibo message was devised and sent by Frank Drake and Carl Sagan in 1974. 11:25 – Two important acronyms in this world: the search for extraterrestrial life (SETI) and messaging extraterrestrial life (METI). 14:40 – In case you need a refresher on what an exoplanet is—as I did—here is a place to start. 20:38 – For more on the idea of Mathematical Platonism, see this article in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. A few alternatives to Mathematical Platonism have been proposed, including the theories of Embodied Mathematics put forward by George Lakoff & Rafael Núñez in Where Mathematics Comes From. 27:00 – A brief survey of the different numeral base systems used in across human languages. 28:30 – For a bit about John Lilly, read his obituary or see this article on his role in SETI. Lilly promoted the idea that communicating with aliens might be akin to communicating with dolphins. 30:50 – Another analogy: decoding alien messages might be like decoding ancient scripts like Linear B. 34:20 – For more on the dolphin whistle research we discuss, see here. 36:16 – Noam Chomsky's idea that recursion is a key—perhaps the key feature—of human language is controversial. For discussion of this claim—and an equally controversial rejection of it—see this article. 37:50 – For examples of the communication abilities of Koko the gorilla, see here. Koko died in 2018. 44:45 – See here for more about the Pioneer Plaques, and here for more about the Golden Voyager Record. 48:30 – Here is a list of the musical recordings that were included on the Golden Voyager Record. 51:20 – For more about the Cosmic Call messages, see here. 53:10 – The controversial Pioneer Plaque image. 56:49 – The website for METI International. 1:03:30 – The 2015 announcement of a $100 million donation to fund SETI research is discussed here.   Daniel Oberhaus's end-of-show recommendations: Intelligent Life in the Universe, by I.S. Shklovskii and Carl Sagan Communication with Extraterrestrial Intelligence, edited by Carl Sagan The best way to keep up with Daniel is on Twitter @DMOberhaus. His personal website is: http://www.danieloberhaus.com/   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://www.diverseintelligencessummer.com/), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted by Kensy Cooperrider, with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster, and Associate Director Hilda Loury. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play—or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

It's hard to say exactly when, but some tens of thousands of years ago, our best friends were born. I'm referring, of course, to dogs. This didn't happen overnight—it was a long process. And it not only changed how those canids behaved and what they looked like, it also changed their brains. As wolves gave way to proto-dogs, and proto-dogs gave way to dingoes and dalmatians and Dobermanns and all the rest, their brains have continued to change. What can we learn from this singular saga? What does it tell us about dogs, about domestication, and about brains?  My guest today is Dr. Erin Hecht. Erin is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Human Evolutionary Biology at Harvard, where she directs the Canine Brains Project.   Here Erin and I talk about how dogs are the most anatomically diverse species on the planet—and how their brains are no exception. We sketch the different waves in the dog domestication saga and discuss scenarios for how that saga got underway. We talk about how brains change as they get bigger and about how they change during domestication. We discuss a recent study by Erin and colleagues comparing the brains of modern dogs with the brains of pre-modern dogs like village dogs and New Guinea singing dogs. We also talk about a new study from Erin's lab finding that domestic dogs share with humans a key language-related structure. Along the way we talk about the Russian Farm Fox experiment, the stereotype of the gentle giant, the left lateralization of language, the respiratory condition known as BOAS, the dog personality inventory known as C-BARQ, the limitations of the idea of a "domestication syndrome," and the puppy kidnapping hypothesis.   Longtime listeners will recall that we had Erin on the show to talk about her work on fermentation and brain evolution. Given how much fun we had with that one, it was only a matter of time before we had her back to talk about her main line of research on dog brains. So here you go friends—hope you enjoy it!    Notes 4:30 – For one recent study of the early domestication of dogs, see here. For a review of leading hypotheses about what drove the wolf-to-dog transition, see here.   13:00 – For Dr. Hecht's initial 2019 study of brain variation across domestic dog breeds, see here. 20:00 – For a classic paper on the neurodevelopmental scaling by Dr. Barbara Finlay and colleagues, see here. 23:00 – For more of Dr. Hecht's work on neurodevelopmental scaling laws as they apply to dogs, see here. For a study reporting correlations between body size and personality in dogs, see here.   29:00 – See Dr. Hecht and colleagues'  recent paper on the evolutionary neuroscience of domestication. 31:00 – See Dr. Hecht and colleagues'  recent paper on brain changes seen in the Russian farm-fox experiment. 37:00 – For more on the idea of "domestication syndrome," see our recent episode with Dr. Kevin Lala and this critical discussion. For a classic treatment of the idea that domestication involves reduction in brain size, see here. 41:00 – For the recent study by Dr. Hecht and colleagues comparing the brains of modern and pre-modern dog breeds, see here. 43:00 – For video of a New Guinea Singing Dog singing, see here. 47:00 – For more about the dog personality inventory known as the C-BARQ, see here.  51:00 – For Dr. Hecht and colleagues' recent study on an analog to the "arcuate fasciculus" in dogs, see here. 58:00 – For Dr. Hecht and colleagues' study on arcuate fasciculus in chimpanzees (and its relationship to communicative behavior), see here. For more discussion of the hemispheric lateralization of language, see our recent interview with Dr. Ev Federenko. 1:04:00 – The website of the Functional Dog Collaborative.   Recommendations Dogs: A New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behavior and Evolution, Raymond & Lorna Coppinger Evolving Brains, John Allman

It seems we've always had monsters among us. We've long been enthralled by dragons and giants, by the likes of Frankenstein and Godzilla and Dracula, by witches and werewolves and countless others. They roam our maps and creation myths; they crop up in our dreams, in our children's books, in our political rhetoric. Where do these beings spring from? What do they do for us? How have they changed over time? And, ultimately, what do our monsters say about their makers? My guests today are Dr. Natalie Lawrence and Dr. Surekha Davies. Both are historians of science and authors of recent books on monsters: Natalie's book is Enchanted creatures: Our monsters and their meanings. Surekha's book is Humans: A monstrous history. Here, Surekha, Natalie, and I talk about monsters as category breakers and boundary walkers—and about how monstrosity is in the eye of the beholder. We walk through a menagerie of monsters—from the apocryphal blemmyes of old travelogues, to a hairy-faced girl in 16th century France, to the figure of Caliban in The Tempest. We discuss the psychological and cultural forces that generate monsters. And we talk about whether anyone would want to live in a world without them. Along the way, we touch on the "monstrification" of social groups; psychoanalysis; our primal fear of snakes; curiosity cabinets; therianthropes and the Cave of the Three Brothers; the relationship between monstrosity and geography; our long fascination with so-called monstrous births; the Muppet Show; dinosaurs and sea creatures; and the question of what monsters might do for children in particular. Alright friends, it's the monstrous season and this is a fun one to help you celebrate. Enjoy!   Notes 3:00 – Grendel's mother has often been a subject of critical discussion and adaptation. See, for instance, the 2018 novel, The Mere Wife. 12:30 – For a classic history-of-science treatment of "wonders" (including monsters) and our conceptions of nature, see here.  18:30 – For those unfamiliar with muppets, an episode of the Muppet Show, which premiered in 1976. 24:00 – The blemmyes were often the subjects of illustration—for examples, see here. 26:00 – For more on Sir Walter Raleigh and the blemmyes, see Dr. Davies' recent newsletter post. 29:00 – One example of monsters at the margins of maps can be seen in the Psalter World Map. 32:00 – For more on Cave of the Trois-Frères and the Sorcerer, see here.  34:00 – For more on shamanism, see our recent episode with Manvir Singh.  37:00 – Therianthropes are relatively rare in cave art, but have nonetheless been widely discussed. For an example, see here. 39:00 – For more on Antonietta Gonsalvus and her family, including examples of how she was represented in paintings of the era, see here.  45:00 – The trope of monsters in creation stories is often called "chaoskampf." 47:00 – The meanings of Medusa have been widely discussed and debated. See here for an example.  52:00 – For more about Caliban, and the racial and colonial dimensions of the Tempest, see here.  57:00 – The Steinbeck quote comes from his book, The Log from 'The Sea of Cortez.'   Recommendations The Ashgate Research Companion to Monsters and the Monstrous, edited by Asa Simon Mittman & Peter J. Dendle Spectacle of Deformity, by Nadja Durbach The Modern Myths, by Philip Ball The Monsters and the Critics (and other essays), by J.R.R. Tolkien No Go the Bogeyman, by Marina Warner Where the Wild Things Are, by Maurice Sendak   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

AI therapists and caregivers. Digital tutors and advisors and friends. Artificial lovers. Griefbots trained to imitate dead loved ones. Welcome, to the bustling world of AI-powered chatbots. This was once the stuff of science fiction, but it's becoming just the stuff of everyday life. What will these systems do to our society, to our relationships, to our social skills and motivations? Are these bots destined to leave us hollowed out, socially stunted, screen-addicted, and wary of good-old-fashioned, in-the-flesh human interaction? Or could they actually be harnessed for good? My guest today is Dr. Henry Shevlin. Henry is a philosopher and AI ethicist at the Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence (CFI) at Cambridge University. In a series of recent papers, Henry has been exploring this brave new world of "social AI" and its philosophical, ethical, and psychological dimensions. Here, Henry and I sketch the current landscape of social AI—from dedicated platforms like Replika and CharacterAI to the more subtly social uses of ChatGPT and Claude. We consider several tragic cases that have recently rocketed these kinds of services into public awareness. We talk about what's changed about AI systems—quite recently—that's now made them capable of sustained relationships. We linger on the possible risks of social AI and, perhaps less obviously, on the possible benefits. And we consider the prospects for regulation. Along the way, Henry and I also talk about his 81-year-old father, his teenage self, and, of course, the kids these days; we consider whether social AI, in its potential harms, is more like social media or more like violent video games; we talk about "deskilling" and it's opposite "upskilling"; and we of course take stock of a certain elephant in the room. Alright friends, this is a fun one. We've been wanting to explore this dawning age of social AI for some time. And we finally found, in Henry, the right person to do it with. Enjoy!   Notes 3:00 – The piece in The Guardian—'It's time to prepare for AI personhood'—by Jacy Reece Anthis. 5:00 – The Replika subreddit.  9:30 – News coverage of recent research on the bedside manner of AI systems. 10:30 – For a recent paper on AI by the philosopher Ophelia Deroy, see here. 11:30 – For some of Dr. Shevlin's recent writing about "social AI", see here and here. 13:30 – OpenAI's recent report, 'How People Use ChatGPT'. 16:30 – For examples of popular media coverage of recent (tragic) cases involving chatbots, see here, here, here, and here. 21:00 – The paper by Rose Guingrich and Michael Graziano on how users describe their relationships with chatbots. 24:00 – The precise quote by Mark Twain is: "Nothing so needs reforming as other people's habits." 25:30 – The classic paper on Mary's room by Frank Jackson. 27:00 – Dr. Shevlin has also worked on questions about animal minds (e.g., here), as well as a number of issues in AI beyond "social AI" (e.g., here, here). 30:00 – The classic essay by Isaiah Berlin on hedgehogs and foxes. 32:00 – The classic paper on ELIZA, introduced by Joseph Weizenbaum in 1966. A version of ELIZA that you can interact with. For work by Sherry Turkle, see here. 34:00 – Dr. Shevlin's recent paper about the "anthropomimetic turn" in contemporary AI. 41:00 – For recent work on whether current chatbots pass a version of the Turing test, see here.  45:00 – Ted Chiang's story, 'The Lifecycle of Software Objects,' was re-published as part his collection of short fiction, Exhalation. 46:00 – For Dr. Shevlin's recent writing on machine consciousness, see here. 48:00 – For more on the possibility of consciousness in borderline cases (like AI systems), see our past episodes here and here. 52:00 – The study on whether people attribute consciousness to LLMs. 54:30 – A recent paper on griefbots by scholars at the University of Cambridge. A popular article about the phenomenon. 55:30 – A blogpost describing the so-called DigiDan experiment. 1:00:00 – Some of the potentially positive social qualities of AIs are discussed in this essay by Paul Bloom.  1:19:30 – For more on Iain Banks' culture series, see here. 1:20:30 – A popular article on the phenomenon of hikikomori.   Recommendations The Oxford Intersections: AI in Society collection The new podcast, Our Lives with Bots   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

Birds do the darnedest things. They fly, of course. They sing. They hunt in pitch darkness. They hide their food and remember where they put it. They use tools and migrate over astonishingly vast distances—sometimes even sleeping while in flight. How do they do all this? What's going on in their brains that makes these and other remarkable behaviors possible? How did their evolutionary path mold them into the incredible creatures they are today? My guests today are Dr. Andrew Iwaniuk and Dr. Georg Striedter. Andrew is a comparative neuroscientist and Associate Professor at the University of Lethbridge in Canada. Georg is a Professor of Neurobiology and Behavior at the University of California, Irvine. Together they are the authors of the new book, Bird Brains and Behavior: A Synthesis (available open access here). Here, Georg, Andrew, and I consider the deep history of birds—how they skirted the mass extinction event that felled the dinosaurs, and then radiated out into the 11,000 plus species we know today. We talk about how bird brains differ from those of mammals and reptiles—in terms of their size, but also in terms of their major structures, and in terms of their wrinkliness. We tour some of the most peculiar and perplexing bird behaviors, and consider their neural and anatomical underpinnings. Finally, we consider what we can learn from bird brains, not just about birds but about brains in general—how they evolve, how they get wired up, how they do and do not vary. Along the way we touch on barn owls, hummingbirds, megapodes, mallards, pigeons, parrots, starlings, and underestimated waterfowl; we touch on how birds' brains change with the seasons; the enduring mystery of magnetoreception; the possibility of olfactory maps; the optocollic reflex; the social intelligence hypothesis and the extractive foraging hypothesis; precocial versus altricial bird species; split-body gynandromorphy; and the future of non-invasive work in bird neuroscience. Season 7 of Many Minds is now gathering steam. We've got some great episodes in the works for you. Just a little reminder that we'd be grateful—thrilled, even—if you could help us get the word out about our show. You might do this by leaving a rating or a review, or by telling a colleague about us. We really appreciate the support, friends! Without further ado, here's my conversation with Dr. Georg Striedter and Dr. Andrew Iwaniuk. Enjoy!   Notes 8:00 – For more on the deep history of the brains of birds and other vertebrates, see: Dr. Striedter's book (co-authored with R. Glenn Northcutt), Brains Through Time; this paper authored by Dr. Striedter and colleagues; and this paper authored by Dr. Iwaniuk and colleagues. 9:30 – The paper on neuron density in birds, by Dr. Pavel Němec and colleagues. 20:00 – For more about Dr. Striedter and colleagues revising some of the terminology for bird brain structures, see here and here. 24:00 – A paper by Dr. Striedter and colleagues on cortical folding.  34:00 – A recent paper describing seasonal neurogenesis in European starlings. 38:00 – A paper on the phenomenon of unihemispheric sleep across species. 42:00 – A video demonstrating the optocollic reflex in a bird. 45:00 – A paper on the puzzles of magnetoreception in birds and other animals. 51:00 – A classic paper on sound localization in barn owls.  54:00 – A paper by Dr. Iwaniuk and colleagues showing that harriers have an auditory system much like the (better-studied) owl. 58:00 – For more on place cells, the hippocampus, and cognitive maps, see our previous episode with Dr. Hugo Spiers. For more on the evolution of the hippocampus in birds and reptiles, see Dr. Striedter's paper here. 1:02:00 – For images of gynandromorphy in birds, see here and here. 1:10:00 – For a recent paper on "parental provisioning," the precocial-altricial spectrum, and brain size in birds, see here. 1:13:00 – For examples of research on the social intelligence hypothesis in birds and other animals, see here and here. 1:18:00 – For work by Dr. Iwaniuk and colleagues on some of the most interesting features of parrot brains, see here. 1:27:00 – The Avonet database.   Recommendations Flight Paths, by Rebecca Heisman An Immense World, by Ed Yong [former guest!] Mind of the Raven, by Bernd Heinrich Bird Brain, by Nathan Emery Soul Made Flesh, by Carl Zimmer   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

One afternoon you decide to snub your responsibilities and go for a hike. You spend a few hours in the woods or the mountains. You study the bark of trees, you bathe in birdsong, you let your eyes roam along a distant ridgeline. And you come back feeling better, restored somehow—like you have more energy, more patience, more bandwidth. We've all, I'm guessing, had experiences like this. But what's behind these effects? Why would nature restore us? What's the evidence that it really does? And what is even being restored, actually? My guest today is Dr. Marc Berman. Marc is an Associate Professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Chicago where he directs the Environmental Neuroscience Lab. Marc is also the author of a new book, Nature and the Mind: The Science of How Nature Improves Cognitive, Physical, and Social Well-Being. Here, Marc and I talk about Attention Restoration Theory—the idea that nature experiences restore our limited capacity for directed attention. We discuss the broader field of "environmental neuroscience," which Marc helped kickstart and continues to lead. We range across studies from Marc's lab that show nature's beneficial effects—on attention, on mood, and on health. We talk about what the active ingredients in nature seem to be. And we discuss the field's prospects for understanding how nature impacts not just the mind, but the brain itself. Along the way, Marc and I touch on: soft versus harsh fascination; the elusive concept of "mental energy"; trees, wood, fire, and rain; the architect and theorist Christopher Alexander; the value of fake plants; fractalness in space and time; curvature and spirituality; and how nature tends to steer our thoughts in certain directions. Needless to say, we're stoked to be kicking off a new season of Many Minds. If you're new to the show, welcome! If you're already a fan, perhaps you'd consider leaving us a rating or a review on your platform of choice. It really does help us reach new listeners. Alright friends, on to my conversation w/ Dr. Marc Berman. Enjoy!   Notes and links 7:00 – For more on Attention Restoration Theory and the distinctions it makes between directed attention and involuntary attention, see this paper by Dr. Stephen Kaplan. For more on the construct of "directed attention" in general, see this paper by Dr. Kaplan and Dr. Berman. 12:00 – For an overview of the aims and scope of "environmental neuroscience," see this paper by Dr. Berman and colleagues.  17:00 – The 1989 book by Dr. Stephen Kaplan and Dr. Rachel Kaplan, The Experience of Nature  21:30 – For the "walk in the park" study that kickstarted Dr. Berman's research on environmental neuroscience, see here. 25:30 – For some of Dr. Berman and colleagues' work on nature sounds, see here and here. 27:00 – For a study on the possible benefits of nature for children with ADHD, see here.  30:00 – For more on the Garden of the Phoenix (aka the Osaka Garden) in Chicago, see here. For a news article about the benefits of "tiny forests," see here.  34:00 –  See here for the follow-up to the "walk in the park" study with people experiencing depression.  38:00 – For the study on the relationship between tree cover and cardiometabolic health in Toronto, see here.  44:00 – For the classic study by Dr. Roger Ulrich on how the view from one's hospital room may impact recovery, see here. 47:00 – For more on the link between crime and nature in apartment complexes in Chicago, see here.  49:00 – A preprint by Dr. Berman and colleagues on the "compressibility" and memorability of natural images is here. 55:00 – For some of Dr. Berman's earliest work on the "low-level" visual features of natural scenes, see here.  57:00 – For the work, led by Kathryn Schertz, on how natural (or non-natural) images with curved edges direct our thoughts, see here.  1:01:00 – The firelight talk paper is here.  1:02:30 – For the study by Dr. Schertz, Dr. Berman, and colleagues comparing thoughts in the conservatory and at the mall, see here. 1:05:00 – For the study on a historical increase in the use of the generic term "tree" in English, see here. 1:06:00 – Christopher Alexander, the architect and theorist, is perhaps best known for his (co-authored) book, A Pattern Language. For the study by Alex Coburn, Dr. Berman, and colleagues, see here. 1:09:30 – To get a visual flavor of La Sagrada Familia, see here. 1:18:00 – The study on whether people can reliably predict how much they will enjoy a walk in nature.  1:20:00 – For some of Dr. Berman and colleagues' initial work on temporal "fractalness" in the brain, see here.   Recommendations Greg Bratman et al., 'Nature and human well-being: The olfactory pathway' Kim Doell et al., 'Leveraging neuroscience for climate change research' Lucia Mason et al., 'Short-term exposure to nature and benefits for students' cognitive performance: A review'   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).