WEBVTT - Licking, Part 1

0:00:03.000 --> 0:00:06.760
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind production of iHeartRadio.

0:00:12.920 --> 0:00:14.880
<v Speaker 2>Hey, you welcome do Stuff to Blow your Mind. My

0:00:15.000 --> 0:00:16.120
<v Speaker 2>name is Robert Lamb.

0:00:16.040 --> 0:00:18.520
<v Speaker 3>And I am Joe McCormick. And today we're going to

0:00:18.600 --> 0:00:21.800
<v Speaker 3>begin a series of episodes on the theme of licking

0:00:21.960 --> 0:00:25.200
<v Speaker 3>with the tongue, as this behavior appears in nature, in

0:00:25.320 --> 0:00:28.840
<v Speaker 3>human culture, in science, and even in the mass manufacture

0:00:29.000 --> 0:00:32.479
<v Speaker 3>and consumption of candy, as we'll get into later today.

0:00:33.200 --> 0:00:35.800
<v Speaker 3>But Rob, I've got a kind of strange place I

0:00:35.840 --> 0:00:39.400
<v Speaker 3>want to begin with this subject because I actually got

0:00:39.440 --> 0:00:42.400
<v Speaker 3>the idea to talk about licking on the show, not

0:00:42.520 --> 0:00:45.000
<v Speaker 3>by like watching a you know, a deer go for

0:00:45.040 --> 0:00:47.800
<v Speaker 3>assault lick, or by observing a snake's tongue, though I

0:00:47.800 --> 0:00:50.080
<v Speaker 3>think we will end up talking about all those things

0:00:50.120 --> 0:00:54.840
<v Speaker 3>in this series, but by reading about ancient Egyptian curses

0:00:55.000 --> 0:00:55.640
<v Speaker 3>last month.

0:00:56.120 --> 0:00:59.800
<v Speaker 2>Hmmm, all right. It's always an interesting way to go, right,

0:01:00.160 --> 0:01:04.360
<v Speaker 2>especially in considering something that is kind of seemingly mundane,

0:01:04.400 --> 0:01:07.200
<v Speaker 2>And every day we go we start with the esoteric

0:01:07.959 --> 0:01:09.000
<v Speaker 2>in the ritualistic.

0:01:09.280 --> 0:01:11.000
<v Speaker 3>I think that's the way to do it, because now

0:01:11.040 --> 0:01:13.440
<v Speaker 3>every time we look at licking in the real world,

0:01:13.520 --> 0:01:15.639
<v Speaker 3>we can think back to the ways that it's also

0:01:15.800 --> 0:01:20.320
<v Speaker 3>infused with evil or protective magic. So yeah, I came

0:01:20.360 --> 0:01:22.840
<v Speaker 3>across the idea to do this when we did an

0:01:22.840 --> 0:01:26.440
<v Speaker 3>episode earlier in October about ancient Egyptian curses, and in

0:01:26.520 --> 0:01:29.720
<v Speaker 3>preparing for that episode, I was reading parts of some

0:01:29.880 --> 0:01:34.080
<v Speaker 3>books about magical beliefs and practices in ancient Egypt. There's

0:01:34.080 --> 0:01:36.679
<v Speaker 3>one that I mentioned in that episode already. That was

0:01:36.880 --> 0:01:40.240
<v Speaker 3>the book by Geraldine Pinch called Magic in Ancient Egypt,

0:01:40.360 --> 0:01:43.920
<v Speaker 3>University of Texas Press, nineteen ninety four. But there's another

0:01:43.959 --> 0:01:47.960
<v Speaker 3>book that I have in digital form here that is

0:01:48.000 --> 0:01:52.400
<v Speaker 3>by Robert K. Rittner, called The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian

0:01:52.440 --> 0:01:57.720
<v Speaker 3>Magical Practices, University of Chicago Press, nineteen ninety three. Writtener

0:01:57.840 --> 0:02:00.880
<v Speaker 3>I've also referenced in an episode last month, I think

0:02:00.920 --> 0:02:06.200
<v Speaker 3>because he did some translations and a paper on a

0:02:06.280 --> 0:02:09.040
<v Speaker 3>curse we talked about that cursed the reader for reading it.

0:02:09.919 --> 0:02:13.040
<v Speaker 3>But Writtner was an American Egyptologist who lived nineteen fifty

0:02:13.040 --> 0:02:15.400
<v Speaker 3>three to twenty twenty one. He was affiliated with the

0:02:15.520 --> 0:02:20.520
<v Speaker 3>University of Chicago, and this book draws on archaeological and

0:02:20.600 --> 0:02:24.000
<v Speaker 3>literary evidence to try to create a full picture of

0:02:24.120 --> 0:02:29.600
<v Speaker 3>how Egyptian magic was performed, so not just the written

0:02:29.760 --> 0:02:34.000
<v Speaker 3>words of spells and magical texts, but also the physically

0:02:34.080 --> 0:02:38.600
<v Speaker 3>enacted and embodied elements of magic, all the stuff around

0:02:39.040 --> 0:02:42.480
<v Speaker 3>the text of the spells. One of the chapters in

0:02:42.520 --> 0:02:46.880
<v Speaker 3>this book, chapter three, is called Spitting, licking, and Swallowing,

0:02:47.120 --> 0:02:51.320
<v Speaker 3>and it explores what Writtner calls the oral dimension of

0:02:51.520 --> 0:02:55.480
<v Speaker 3>Egyptian magic. And I ended up finding this really interesting.

0:02:55.520 --> 0:02:57.639
<v Speaker 3>So I just want to talk about some things from

0:02:57.720 --> 0:03:00.800
<v Speaker 3>this chapter, especially focused on licking, but we'll have to

0:03:00.840 --> 0:03:03.400
<v Speaker 3>discuss spitting a bit too, because spitting is important.

0:03:03.800 --> 0:03:05.720
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and I think spitting is maybe a little more

0:03:05.720 --> 0:03:09.840
<v Speaker 2>familiar for folks out there who are used to seeing

0:03:09.880 --> 0:03:14.000
<v Speaker 2>it in various fictional depictions of magic. Yeah, you know,

0:03:14.160 --> 0:03:17.120
<v Speaker 2>a witch or wizard spitting on something, spitting into some

0:03:17.160 --> 0:03:18.960
<v Speaker 2>sort of a potion. And then if you're into the

0:03:18.960 --> 0:03:22.120
<v Speaker 2>weirder stuff, there's of course the film Boxer's Omen that

0:03:22.160 --> 0:03:24.919
<v Speaker 2>we recently watched on Weird House Cinema that also involves

0:03:24.960 --> 0:03:26.080
<v Speaker 2>a lot of oral.

0:03:25.880 --> 0:03:29.600
<v Speaker 3>Magic, amazing oral magic, a lot of spitting, a lot

0:03:29.600 --> 0:03:33.520
<v Speaker 3>of chewing up and spitting back out, some chicken butts,

0:03:33.880 --> 0:03:36.280
<v Speaker 3>all kinds of things. But before we go on to

0:03:36.400 --> 0:03:39.680
<v Speaker 3>discuss this licking, spitting, and swallowing chapter. I also just

0:03:39.720 --> 0:03:43.280
<v Speaker 3>wanted to briefly go over a couple of principles that

0:03:43.320 --> 0:03:46.840
<v Speaker 3>we talked about recently in that Egyptian magic episode, but

0:03:47.040 --> 0:03:50.600
<v Speaker 3>that will apply very much here. So one of the

0:03:50.600 --> 0:03:54.840
<v Speaker 3>things that's important to remember is the sort of consensus

0:03:54.840 --> 0:04:00.000
<v Speaker 3>of scholars that in an Egyptian context, the classical anthropological

0:04:00.240 --> 0:04:04.640
<v Speaker 3>distinctions between magic and religion are not very useful. Those

0:04:04.720 --> 0:04:07.520
<v Speaker 3>might apply in some cultures sometimes in history, but in

0:04:07.560 --> 0:04:13.920
<v Speaker 3>ancient Egypt, state affiliated temple activity, religion was fully enmeshed

0:04:13.960 --> 0:04:18.640
<v Speaker 3>with everyday magic. Magic spells were a core part of religion,

0:04:19.040 --> 0:04:23.160
<v Speaker 3>and temple priests were also experts in private everyday magic

0:04:23.279 --> 0:04:26.640
<v Speaker 3>and may have sold their services as magic spell consultants.

0:04:27.000 --> 0:04:30.520
<v Speaker 3>So the magic religion distinction just doesn't really apply to

0:04:30.600 --> 0:04:34.440
<v Speaker 3>ancient Egypt. Religion is full of magic, and magic is

0:04:34.520 --> 0:04:39.080
<v Speaker 3>enmeshed with religion. Another interesting principle of Egyptian magic is

0:04:39.120 --> 0:04:44.600
<v Speaker 3>about language. This is something that on one hand, it

0:04:44.720 --> 0:04:49.159
<v Speaker 3>might sound very simple to conceptualize, maybe you even think

0:04:49.200 --> 0:04:52.120
<v Speaker 3>about the world this way already. In another sense, if

0:04:52.160 --> 0:04:55.760
<v Speaker 3>you really embrace the strangeness of it, it becomes more

0:04:55.800 --> 0:05:00.440
<v Speaker 3>and more powerful in the ancient Egyptian worldview. I think

0:05:00.440 --> 0:05:05.240
<v Speaker 3>it's fair to say that words were not merely symbols

0:05:05.320 --> 0:05:11.279
<v Speaker 3>referring to objects or concepts. Words in themselves, both spoken

0:05:11.440 --> 0:05:16.320
<v Speaker 3>and written, had active power to change and create reality.

0:05:16.760 --> 0:05:20.039
<v Speaker 3>So it's obviously in our reality words are very powerful

0:05:20.160 --> 0:05:22.960
<v Speaker 3>because words convey meaning, and that meaning can be acted

0:05:23.000 --> 0:05:26.000
<v Speaker 3>on by people. But that was not the only way

0:05:26.080 --> 0:05:29.400
<v Speaker 3>words were powerful in ancient Egypt. In ancient Egypt, the

0:05:29.440 --> 0:05:34.840
<v Speaker 3>belief is words themselves do things, and so I think

0:05:34.960 --> 0:05:37.440
<v Speaker 3>perhaps in part this is not the only reason, but

0:05:37.480 --> 0:05:42.360
<v Speaker 3>perhaps in part because spoken words flow from the mouth.

0:05:43.080 --> 0:05:46.480
<v Speaker 3>There is a lot of ritual action in Egyptian magic

0:05:46.920 --> 0:05:50.480
<v Speaker 3>centered on the actions of the mouth, like spitting, licking,

0:05:50.520 --> 0:05:54.680
<v Speaker 3>and swallowing, and ritual attention given to the fluids of

0:05:54.800 --> 0:05:58.200
<v Speaker 3>the mouth cavity. I say that the association with language

0:05:58.200 --> 0:06:01.400
<v Speaker 3>is not the only reason, because just generally, the body

0:06:01.440 --> 0:06:05.640
<v Speaker 3>fluids in ancient Egypt are thought to convey a power

0:06:05.839 --> 0:06:08.520
<v Speaker 3>and vitality of the person they come from, and so

0:06:08.560 --> 0:06:12.279
<v Speaker 3>there's a transference power that works on the principle of

0:06:12.320 --> 0:06:15.200
<v Speaker 3>contact with body fluids of all kinds. But I think

0:06:15.200 --> 0:06:17.520
<v Speaker 3>with the mouth cavity you have this added dimension of

0:06:17.640 --> 0:06:20.760
<v Speaker 3>not only is saliva a powerful body fluid, but it

0:06:20.800 --> 0:06:23.320
<v Speaker 3>comes from the mouth, which is the part that speaks.

0:06:24.360 --> 0:06:27.520
<v Speaker 2>Interesting, so we can I think again, this is probably

0:06:27.560 --> 0:06:30.920
<v Speaker 2>a case where we're more familiar with the power of

0:06:31.000 --> 0:06:36.840
<v Speaker 2>blood being utilized in various fantasy and magical and semi

0:06:36.920 --> 0:06:41.000
<v Speaker 2>magical scenarios and symbolic scenarios as well. So this is

0:06:41.240 --> 0:06:43.400
<v Speaker 2>almost kind of an extension of that level of power,

0:06:43.520 --> 0:06:46.960
<v Speaker 2>but to the spit in saliva.

0:06:47.080 --> 0:06:49.440
<v Speaker 3>But I don't want to downplay the importance of other

0:06:49.560 --> 0:06:52.560
<v Speaker 3>body fluids in ancient Egyptian magic as well. Tears, the

0:06:52.600 --> 0:06:59.120
<v Speaker 3>tears of ray are very important. Tears, spit, blood, minstrel blood,

0:06:59.200 --> 0:07:03.520
<v Speaker 3>semen is all considered magically potent in different ways.

0:07:03.720 --> 0:07:06.160
<v Speaker 2>And of course medically today, Like we know that this

0:07:06.720 --> 0:07:08.640
<v Speaker 2>is this is true, Like there's a lot of data

0:07:08.680 --> 0:07:11.880
<v Speaker 2>in all of these fluids. Yeah, so you know it

0:07:11.960 --> 0:07:12.960
<v Speaker 2>ultimately stacks up.

0:07:13.440 --> 0:07:18.760
<v Speaker 3>So, according to Rittner, here spitting is the most significant

0:07:18.800 --> 0:07:22.360
<v Speaker 3>of these three actions. Spitting plays a huge role in

0:07:22.480 --> 0:07:25.520
<v Speaker 3>Egyptian mythology, not just in what you're supposed to do

0:07:25.560 --> 0:07:29.080
<v Speaker 3>in the text of these spells, but but in like

0:07:29.160 --> 0:07:32.280
<v Speaker 3>the creation narratives. So in some versions of the Egyptian

0:07:32.320 --> 0:07:35.240
<v Speaker 3>creation myth, you know, had various forms, but in some

0:07:35.360 --> 0:07:38.280
<v Speaker 3>of them, the creator deity, whichever one it is, in

0:07:38.320 --> 0:07:41.760
<v Speaker 3>this form, emerges out of the waters of chaos onto

0:07:41.880 --> 0:07:44.560
<v Speaker 3>the mound of earth, the initial mound of earth that

0:07:44.600 --> 0:07:47.040
<v Speaker 3>comes out of the water, and then creates the other

0:07:47.120 --> 0:07:51.640
<v Speaker 3>gods by spitting, sometimes by ejaculating, but sometimes by spitting.

0:07:52.400 --> 0:07:56.840
<v Speaker 3>And he gives the example of the Heliopolitan creation myth,

0:07:57.280 --> 0:07:59.840
<v Speaker 3>where you've got the sun god coming up out of

0:08:00.160 --> 0:08:02.320
<v Speaker 3>water and then is on the mound, and the Sun

0:08:02.320 --> 0:08:06.560
<v Speaker 3>God's spittle creates the primordial pair of God's shoe, the

0:08:06.600 --> 0:08:11.080
<v Speaker 3>god of the air and Tefnut of moisture. And so

0:08:11.320 --> 0:08:14.520
<v Speaker 3>there is this link between spitting and the kind of

0:08:14.640 --> 0:08:18.840
<v Speaker 3>creative magic, the creating force that gives rise or generation

0:08:19.000 --> 0:08:24.120
<v Speaker 3>to all things. Writtner gives translations of several different text passages.

0:08:24.480 --> 0:08:26.960
<v Speaker 3>One of them is referring to this creation narrative where

0:08:26.960 --> 0:08:30.880
<v Speaker 3>the sun god Atom is the creator here Atum and

0:08:31.280 --> 0:08:34.400
<v Speaker 3>this says Atom spat me out as the spittle of

0:08:34.440 --> 0:08:37.880
<v Speaker 3>his mouth, together with my sister Tefnut. But then you

0:08:37.920 --> 0:08:41.600
<v Speaker 3>get other expressions such as raise yourself ray. This is

0:08:41.679 --> 0:08:45.400
<v Speaker 3>the solar deity, ray, raise yourself, ray, spit out the day,

0:08:47.240 --> 0:08:51.280
<v Speaker 3>and as something cast off from a god's body. Body

0:08:51.320 --> 0:08:56.400
<v Speaker 3>fluids like spit convey the God's divine power, and so

0:08:56.679 --> 0:09:00.440
<v Speaker 3>spitting is used in spells of healing and blessing, often

0:09:00.520 --> 0:09:04.680
<v Speaker 3>symbolizing a transfer of the invigorating power of the God

0:09:04.880 --> 0:09:08.599
<v Speaker 3>to the recipient of the spittle, whether literal or symbolic.

0:09:09.080 --> 0:09:11.680
<v Speaker 3>So spitting is very big in Egyptian magic.

0:09:12.200 --> 0:09:15.439
<v Speaker 2>You know, I can't help but be reminded of I

0:09:15.480 --> 0:09:17.080
<v Speaker 2>don't even know if this is This is probably not

0:09:17.120 --> 0:09:20.800
<v Speaker 2>even current slang, but in some of the older hip

0:09:20.840 --> 0:09:23.960
<v Speaker 2>hop that I have listened to, spit is often used

0:09:23.960 --> 0:09:26.520
<v Speaker 2>as a way of talking about I guess you would say,

0:09:27.320 --> 0:09:30.120
<v Speaker 2>the delivery of lyrics with a certain amount of skill

0:09:30.200 --> 0:09:34.440
<v Speaker 2>and rhythm. Yeah. And it creative force, yeah yeah, creative

0:09:34.440 --> 0:09:37.840
<v Speaker 2>force through language, through spoken word. And it seems very

0:09:37.920 --> 0:09:40.200
<v Speaker 2>much in line with what we're talking about here. Yeah.

0:09:40.400 --> 0:09:43.120
<v Speaker 3>I think that's a great parallel actually, because my understanding

0:09:43.160 --> 0:09:46.760
<v Speaker 3>of the connotation of spit there is that it is

0:09:47.320 --> 0:09:50.280
<v Speaker 3>not just saying like, okay, talk now. It means, like,

0:09:50.600 --> 0:09:53.120
<v Speaker 3>you know, you use your power of creation. There's like

0:09:53.120 --> 0:09:58.160
<v Speaker 3>an emphasis on the creative generative element there So anyway,

0:09:58.920 --> 0:10:00.440
<v Speaker 3>the next thing, of course I want to come to

0:10:00.520 --> 0:10:04.240
<v Speaker 3>is licking, the subject of today. Licking is mentioned less

0:10:04.280 --> 0:10:08.360
<v Speaker 3>frequently than spitting in Egyptian magical texts, but it is

0:10:08.400 --> 0:10:13.240
<v Speaker 3>nevertheless a really interesting and significant action in Egyptian magic

0:10:13.280 --> 0:10:17.400
<v Speaker 3>and religion. Licking, I would say, has some of the

0:10:17.440 --> 0:10:22.040
<v Speaker 3>same physiomagical properties as spitting, in that it involves the

0:10:22.120 --> 0:10:26.920
<v Speaker 3>transfer of saliva, which is again imbued with the divine

0:10:27.040 --> 0:10:30.480
<v Speaker 3>power of the mouth from which it comes. But it

0:10:30.520 --> 0:10:34.080
<v Speaker 3>also has uses of its own for spells of healing

0:10:34.160 --> 0:10:38.120
<v Speaker 3>or blessing and for curses or attacks. So I want

0:10:38.160 --> 0:10:40.280
<v Speaker 3>to talk about some of the examples that Rittner brings

0:10:40.360 --> 0:10:45.120
<v Speaker 3>up offering rituals of the Pyramid texts. This would include

0:10:45.440 --> 0:10:48.720
<v Speaker 3>spells one sixty six and one eighty one, and the

0:10:48.880 --> 0:10:54.040
<v Speaker 3>Coffin texts spell nine thirty six, all described the following scenario.

0:10:54.800 --> 0:10:59.479
<v Speaker 3>After death, the spirit of the deceased king is presented,

0:11:00.200 --> 0:11:03.760
<v Speaker 3>is presented with or put before two bowls of fruit

0:11:03.960 --> 0:11:07.160
<v Speaker 3>from the ziziphus plant. This is a fruit known as

0:11:07.240 --> 0:11:10.920
<v Speaker 3>the jujub or sometimes as the red date or Chinese date.

0:11:11.080 --> 0:11:13.120
<v Speaker 3>The use of the word date there can be confusing

0:11:13.160 --> 0:11:15.199
<v Speaker 3>because this is different from the dates that are the

0:11:15.240 --> 0:11:17.080
<v Speaker 3>fruit of the date palm.

0:11:17.080 --> 0:11:19.160
<v Speaker 2>Okay, so confusing in the same way that a pine

0:11:19.160 --> 0:11:20.120
<v Speaker 2>apple is not an apple.

0:11:20.120 --> 0:11:23.360
<v Speaker 3>And exactly yeah, yeah, So this is the fruit of

0:11:23.400 --> 0:11:28.320
<v Speaker 3>the zizyphus plant, and the text says these fruits or

0:11:28.360 --> 0:11:32.440
<v Speaker 3>fruit bowls, they're referred to in the spells as the

0:11:32.559 --> 0:11:37.560
<v Speaker 3>eye of Horus, which they have licked. Were that they

0:11:37.800 --> 0:11:41.240
<v Speaker 3>that lick to the eye of Horace a couple of possibilities.

0:11:41.360 --> 0:11:45.200
<v Speaker 3>Writtener cites a scholar who argues that they are the

0:11:45.240 --> 0:11:50.000
<v Speaker 3>followers of Seth or set the destructive god of storms, chaos,

0:11:50.040 --> 0:11:53.880
<v Speaker 3>and the desert wilderness. If that's correct, this licking of

0:11:53.920 --> 0:11:57.160
<v Speaker 3>the fruit would represent a magical attack against the eye

0:11:57.240 --> 0:12:02.360
<v Speaker 3>of Horace. The licking somehowers heck of violence onto the eye.

0:12:03.200 --> 0:12:07.520
<v Speaker 3>But Writtner argues that while there is offensive licking sorcery

0:12:07.600 --> 0:12:10.559
<v Speaker 3>of this kind in Egyptian spells, that's probably not what's

0:12:10.640 --> 0:12:13.440
<v Speaker 3>going on here. He thinks it is more likely this

0:12:13.520 --> 0:12:17.199
<v Speaker 3>passage refers to a motif of the sacred healing of

0:12:18.000 --> 0:12:22.839
<v Speaker 3>Horace's eye by way of licks from the gods. After all,

0:12:22.960 --> 0:12:25.920
<v Speaker 3>the eye of Horace presented to the king here should

0:12:25.960 --> 0:12:29.160
<v Speaker 3>be sound and well, not envenomed with the curse of

0:12:29.200 --> 0:12:32.200
<v Speaker 3>the Sethian tongue, and Rittner points out that there are

0:12:32.240 --> 0:12:36.160
<v Speaker 3>other spells where an injured or troubled eye is restored

0:12:36.640 --> 0:12:40.120
<v Speaker 3>by the power of Holy saliva through healing spells that

0:12:40.240 --> 0:12:43.840
<v Speaker 3>involve spitting, and this licking could be envisioned as a

0:12:43.880 --> 0:12:48.720
<v Speaker 3>parallel mechanism. And Rittner points out that this mirror's phenomena

0:12:48.840 --> 0:12:53.600
<v Speaker 3>observed in nature the licking of wounds by animals as

0:12:53.760 --> 0:12:56.520
<v Speaker 3>magical licking here would seem to tap into both what

0:12:56.760 --> 0:13:01.000
<v Speaker 3>we see in other animals and perhaps even in instincts

0:13:01.040 --> 0:13:04.800
<v Speaker 3>that we ourselves still possess to some extent, even if

0:13:04.800 --> 0:13:08.440
<v Speaker 3>we don't always express them. Another important piece of licking

0:13:08.520 --> 0:13:11.679
<v Speaker 3>imagery along these lines the healing the healing licks of

0:13:11.720 --> 0:13:16.120
<v Speaker 3>the gods. The cow goddess Hathor bestows blessings on her

0:13:16.160 --> 0:13:20.480
<v Speaker 3>offspring Horace by licking him in the same manner that

0:13:20.559 --> 0:13:23.760
<v Speaker 3>an earthly cow can be seen licking her newborn calf,

0:13:24.600 --> 0:13:28.400
<v Speaker 3>and we get texts saying that Hathor blessed the pharaoh

0:13:28.440 --> 0:13:32.640
<v Speaker 3>Queen Hatchepsitt of the eighteenth dynasty in the same way.

0:13:32.920 --> 0:13:37.839
<v Speaker 3>Quote kissing your hand, licking your limbs, endowing your majesty

0:13:38.120 --> 0:13:44.360
<v Speaker 3>with life and dominion. Yeah. Interesting. I think it's interesting

0:13:44.440 --> 0:13:48.760
<v Speaker 3>there the way that seems to be casting the Pharaoh,

0:13:48.800 --> 0:13:52.280
<v Speaker 3>who we want their image to be one of power

0:13:52.280 --> 0:13:55.800
<v Speaker 3>and dominion, life, power, vigor, dominion, Like it's saying they're

0:13:55.840 --> 0:14:01.000
<v Speaker 3>being given, you know, the majesty of the throne in

0:14:01.040 --> 0:14:05.240
<v Speaker 3>this saying here, But the imagery is actually of a

0:14:05.280 --> 0:14:08.680
<v Speaker 3>little baby being taken care of by its mother in nature,

0:14:08.760 --> 0:14:11.240
<v Speaker 3>a calf being licked by the mother cow.

0:14:11.760 --> 0:14:13.960
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. And if you've ever seen, I mean certainly we have.

0:14:14.280 --> 0:14:18.640
<v Speaker 2>We have farmers and folks that live more closely to

0:14:19.320 --> 0:14:21.440
<v Speaker 2>cattle out there who can attest to this as well.

0:14:21.640 --> 0:14:24.600
<v Speaker 2>But if you've seen at least seen footage of this occurring,

0:14:24.880 --> 0:14:27.440
<v Speaker 2>there is almost this sense that like the cow is

0:14:27.640 --> 0:14:30.600
<v Speaker 2>the cat, the calf is born, and then the cow

0:14:30.880 --> 0:14:33.720
<v Speaker 2>licks this calf, and that is what truly brings it

0:14:33.760 --> 0:14:36.320
<v Speaker 2>to life. Yeah. So you can you can see where

0:14:36.320 --> 0:14:39.720
<v Speaker 2>this powerful connection could be forged, you know, just via

0:14:39.840 --> 0:14:41.520
<v Speaker 2>observation of the natural world.

0:14:41.760 --> 0:14:42.320
<v Speaker 4>Yeah.

0:14:42.480 --> 0:14:43.920
<v Speaker 3>So I want to come back to some of these

0:14:44.040 --> 0:14:47.400
<v Speaker 3>licking behaviors and animals in the next part in this series,

0:14:47.440 --> 0:14:49.680
<v Speaker 3>where we're definitely going to talk about wound licking and

0:14:50.480 --> 0:14:54.680
<v Speaker 3>about licking of offspring as well. But coming back to

0:14:55.720 --> 0:14:59.400
<v Speaker 3>the magical looking here, that which is true of gods

0:14:59.400 --> 0:15:02.880
<v Speaker 3>and pharaoh is also true of spirits in the afterlife.

0:15:03.320 --> 0:15:05.280
<v Speaker 3>In the Book of the Dead, we are told that

0:15:05.400 --> 0:15:08.520
<v Speaker 3>Hathor licks the dead man's hand to give him the

0:15:08.560 --> 0:15:12.040
<v Speaker 3>power of rebirth. And then there's a really interesting aside

0:15:12.080 --> 0:15:14.560
<v Speaker 3>by Writtener here where he compares this to a story

0:15:14.560 --> 0:15:18.400
<v Speaker 3>that's not from Egyptian texts but from Greek legends. So

0:15:18.480 --> 0:15:23.200
<v Speaker 3>Writtner writes, quote, a contrasting concept associated with the APIs

0:15:23.280 --> 0:15:27.160
<v Speaker 3>bull survives in the Greek legends of the astronomer Eudoxus

0:15:27.200 --> 0:15:30.880
<v Speaker 3>of Nidos, a pupil of Plato who subsequently traveled to

0:15:30.960 --> 0:15:33.920
<v Speaker 3>Egypt to study with the native clergy in the fourth

0:15:33.920 --> 0:15:38.359
<v Speaker 3>century BC. When his cloak was licked by the APIs,

0:15:38.520 --> 0:15:41.720
<v Speaker 3>Eudoxus was informed by the priests that his fame would

0:15:41.760 --> 0:15:45.440
<v Speaker 3>be great, but that his life would be short. He had,

0:15:45.560 --> 0:15:50.720
<v Speaker 3>in effect acquired certain qualities of Osiris transmitted by the

0:15:50.760 --> 0:15:55.240
<v Speaker 3>god's earthly representative, the APIs. We know we actually did

0:15:55.240 --> 0:16:00.120
<v Speaker 3>some episodes a while back on the Osiris legend, and

0:16:00.160 --> 0:16:04.000
<v Speaker 3>of course Osiris is a god who is killed and dismembered,

0:16:04.640 --> 0:16:08.240
<v Speaker 3>so that, yeah, there's a duality there. Of course Osiris

0:16:08.360 --> 0:16:12.640
<v Speaker 3>is great and powerful and is famed, but does suffer

0:16:12.720 --> 0:16:16.520
<v Speaker 3>this fate before being sort of reassembled in the afterlife.

0:16:16.840 --> 0:16:20.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, yeah, he death is part of his existence.

0:16:21.000 --> 0:16:23.720
<v Speaker 2>I mean, as as it is for all of us.

0:16:23.800 --> 0:16:28.440
<v Speaker 3>To be clear, But that combination of greatness and early

0:16:28.560 --> 0:16:32.520
<v Speaker 3>doom is transferred to this human being when it is

0:16:32.640 --> 0:16:45.320
<v Speaker 3>licked by the bull that represents the power of Osiris.

0:16:46.240 --> 0:16:49.440
<v Speaker 3>Now I want to turn to therapeutic licking, So spells

0:16:49.520 --> 0:16:53.720
<v Speaker 3>that are actually designed to heal heal wounds. There were

0:16:53.760 --> 0:16:57.920
<v Speaker 3>healing rituals performed by human priests that probably would involve

0:16:58.040 --> 0:17:02.120
<v Speaker 3>literal licking. An example he is the Coffin Texts spell

0:17:02.200 --> 0:17:06.040
<v Speaker 3>eighty one, where the performer of the spell identifies himself

0:17:06.080 --> 0:17:10.320
<v Speaker 3>with Shoe, the god of air, light and wind, whose

0:17:10.400 --> 0:17:14.359
<v Speaker 3>name means emptiness. In this spell, the hand of the

0:17:14.400 --> 0:17:20.119
<v Speaker 3>deceased is painted with representations of eight Egyptian deities in

0:17:20.280 --> 0:17:24.560
<v Speaker 3>yellow pigment and Nubian ochre, and then the spell is

0:17:24.800 --> 0:17:29.000
<v Speaker 3>spoken aloud over these images, and then finally it says

0:17:29.080 --> 0:17:32.320
<v Speaker 3>that the painted images of the gods are to be

0:17:32.520 --> 0:17:37.600
<v Speaker 3>quote licked off every day very early. Rittner says that

0:17:38.000 --> 0:17:40.960
<v Speaker 3>like many of the Coffin text spells, it sounds like

0:17:41.200 --> 0:17:44.040
<v Speaker 3>it is meant exclusively for the benefit of the dead,

0:17:44.200 --> 0:17:47.919
<v Speaker 3>but it was probably actually used by the living. It

0:17:47.960 --> 0:17:50.720
<v Speaker 3>sounds kind of weird as phrased, But I wonder if

0:17:50.760 --> 0:17:53.800
<v Speaker 3>the idea of licking off the images of the gods

0:17:54.200 --> 0:17:59.000
<v Speaker 3>very early, meaning in the morning, corresponds to the time

0:17:59.080 --> 0:18:02.040
<v Speaker 3>of dawn, because Writtner points out that there is a

0:18:02.119 --> 0:18:06.520
<v Speaker 3>mythological passage sighted in the spell, and this passage states

0:18:06.560 --> 0:18:09.639
<v Speaker 3>that the gods shoe is blessed with kisses from the

0:18:09.680 --> 0:18:13.760
<v Speaker 3>sun god Autumn every day, and the Coffin texts sometimes

0:18:13.880 --> 0:18:16.919
<v Speaker 3>use the imagery of a favored deity getting licked with

0:18:17.119 --> 0:18:19.200
<v Speaker 3>sunshine by the sun god at dawn.

0:18:19.560 --> 0:18:20.600
<v Speaker 2>Oh nice.

0:18:21.000 --> 0:18:24.400
<v Speaker 3>And again this is especially significant because the sun god Autumn,

0:18:24.680 --> 0:18:28.960
<v Speaker 3>as one of the creator deities, has especially powerful saliva,

0:18:29.080 --> 0:18:32.800
<v Speaker 3>creative saliva. He can spit gods into existence, and now

0:18:32.880 --> 0:18:36.359
<v Speaker 3>at dawn he licks the world with his rays. Some

0:18:36.480 --> 0:18:40.120
<v Speaker 3>curative looking had nothing to do with funerary use or imagery.

0:18:40.119 --> 0:18:42.800
<v Speaker 3>It was just good old fashioned healing. Of body ailments.

0:18:43.440 --> 0:18:47.440
<v Speaker 3>So Writtner cites a twelfth dynasty manuscript known as Papyrus

0:18:47.480 --> 0:18:51.679
<v Speaker 3>Turin fifty four zero zero three, which includes the following

0:18:51.720 --> 0:18:54.880
<v Speaker 3>spell for the treatment of the eyes. And by the way,

0:18:54.920 --> 0:18:58.080
<v Speaker 3>I looked up this papyrus to see what else it said.

0:18:58.160 --> 0:19:00.360
<v Speaker 3>In addition to the spells for healing the eyes, which

0:19:00.359 --> 0:19:02.760
<v Speaker 3>I'm going to read from here, it's got spells designed

0:19:02.760 --> 0:19:07.000
<v Speaker 3>to protect from serpents and to extract fish bones. I

0:19:07.040 --> 0:19:09.520
<v Speaker 3>didn't figure out extract them from wear, Maybe from.

0:19:09.320 --> 0:19:11.600
<v Speaker 2>The throat or from the fish.

0:19:12.280 --> 0:19:13.920
<v Speaker 3>I don't know. I want to learn more about that,

0:19:14.400 --> 0:19:16.600
<v Speaker 3>but I didn't get there. So this is the part

0:19:16.640 --> 0:19:19.840
<v Speaker 3>about healing the eyes. I thought this text is great.

0:19:20.400 --> 0:19:24.560
<v Speaker 3>So this is the Writtner's translation here quote, my eyes

0:19:24.600 --> 0:19:27.360
<v Speaker 3>are opened by the Great One. My eyes are opened

0:19:27.480 --> 0:19:30.840
<v Speaker 3>by the Opener. The eyes of Hathor are opened in

0:19:30.880 --> 0:19:33.760
<v Speaker 3>the house of the statue. The eyes of Hathor are

0:19:33.800 --> 0:19:36.680
<v Speaker 3>opened in the house of Gold, that she might look

0:19:36.920 --> 0:19:40.200
<v Speaker 3>at that red animal when he opens his mouth, when

0:19:40.240 --> 0:19:43.120
<v Speaker 3>he opens his jaws, when he looks at that pupil

0:19:43.160 --> 0:19:46.639
<v Speaker 3>of gold. Feance. And by the way, we just had

0:19:46.680 --> 0:19:48.080
<v Speaker 3>to look that up because neither of us knew what

0:19:48.160 --> 0:19:50.600
<v Speaker 3>it was. That's like a type of tin glazed pottery,

0:19:51.520 --> 0:19:56.679
<v Speaker 3>pupil of gold, feance, quartz and Carnelian which flourishes on

0:19:56.840 --> 0:20:02.000
<v Speaker 3>the eye of the Majesty of Ta when isis bent over,

0:20:02.440 --> 0:20:06.199
<v Speaker 3>she licked it. When I bent over my eye, I

0:20:06.320 --> 0:20:09.600
<v Speaker 3>licked it from this my face, from this my eye,

0:20:09.640 --> 0:20:12.680
<v Speaker 3>I dispelled. The blow of a god, goddess, dead man

0:20:12.800 --> 0:20:16.720
<v Speaker 3>or dead woman dispelled. Is the obscurity being thoroughly stripped

0:20:16.720 --> 0:20:20.000
<v Speaker 3>away as she has licked what was done to him.

0:20:20.440 --> 0:20:23.280
<v Speaker 3>So Mott has licked what was done to her. And

0:20:23.320 --> 0:20:25.360
<v Speaker 3>then the last sentence to be said by a man

0:20:25.400 --> 0:20:30.359
<v Speaker 3>as he puts water into his eyes. Though these spells

0:20:30.359 --> 0:20:34.400
<v Speaker 3>are often best interpreted literally when it comes to physical action,

0:20:34.600 --> 0:20:37.480
<v Speaker 3>in this case, Writtner says that the licking might not

0:20:37.600 --> 0:20:40.719
<v Speaker 3>be literal because there's that last sentence that seems to

0:20:40.760 --> 0:20:44.320
<v Speaker 3>specify the spell is spoken as a man symbolically licks

0:20:44.359 --> 0:20:46.720
<v Speaker 3>his eyes by placing eye drops into them.

0:20:47.040 --> 0:20:50.359
<v Speaker 2>Hmmm, yeah, yeah, okay, Yeah, you could think of putting

0:20:50.400 --> 0:20:53.640
<v Speaker 2>eye drops in as licking. Yeah, the licking of the eye. Yeah,

0:20:53.640 --> 0:20:55.120
<v Speaker 2>I mean, it's accomplished the same thing.

0:20:55.440 --> 0:20:58.000
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, It's like the gods are licking my eyes as

0:20:58.040 --> 0:21:01.680
<v Speaker 3>I put eye drops in isis is down licking my eye.

0:21:02.960 --> 0:21:05.399
<v Speaker 3>But there is literal licking and healing magic as well.

0:21:05.680 --> 0:21:10.320
<v Speaker 3>Many of these spells prescribe actually the licking off of

0:21:10.560 --> 0:21:15.600
<v Speaker 3>images or words of the spell, sometimes inscribed on the hand,

0:21:15.760 --> 0:21:17.560
<v Speaker 3>like I mentioned earlier, with those you know the eight

0:21:17.600 --> 0:21:19.400
<v Speaker 3>gods are written on the hand, and then you must

0:21:19.480 --> 0:21:23.480
<v Speaker 3>lick it off very early, very early every day. There

0:21:23.520 --> 0:21:28.359
<v Speaker 3>is an anti scorpion sting magical spell from Papyrus Turin

0:21:28.760 --> 0:21:32.040
<v Speaker 3>one nine ninety three the legend of Isis and the

0:21:32.080 --> 0:21:34.800
<v Speaker 3>secret name of Ray, and it goes like this. This

0:21:34.840 --> 0:21:38.440
<v Speaker 3>is written theer's translation again quote words to be recited

0:21:38.480 --> 0:21:41.240
<v Speaker 3>over an image of Autumn and horrus of praise, a

0:21:41.280 --> 0:21:44.159
<v Speaker 3>figure of Isis and an image of Horus drawn on

0:21:44.240 --> 0:21:46.719
<v Speaker 3>the hand of the sufferer, and licked off by the

0:21:46.760 --> 0:21:50.400
<v Speaker 3>man do likewise on a strip of fine linen placed

0:21:50.400 --> 0:21:54.200
<v Speaker 3>on the sufferer at his throat. Its plant is scorpion plant,

0:21:54.880 --> 0:21:57.000
<v Speaker 3>and that is a type of plant. I think it's

0:21:57.000 --> 0:22:00.960
<v Speaker 3>supposed to resemble a scorpion's tail or. Ground up with

0:22:01.080 --> 0:22:03.480
<v Speaker 3>beer or wine. It is drunk by the man who

0:22:03.480 --> 0:22:06.480
<v Speaker 3>has a scorpion sting. It is what kills the poison

0:22:06.720 --> 0:22:12.639
<v Speaker 3>truly effective, proved a million times. So you draw the

0:22:12.640 --> 0:22:16.800
<v Speaker 3>gods on the scorpion victim's hand and then someone licks

0:22:16.880 --> 0:22:19.680
<v Speaker 3>the image off. Actually couldn't tell from the text when

0:22:19.720 --> 0:22:22.639
<v Speaker 3>it says licked off by the man. I don't know

0:22:22.640 --> 0:22:25.000
<v Speaker 3>if that means licked off by the same part by

0:22:25.040 --> 0:22:27.200
<v Speaker 3>the victim they're licking their own hand, or licked off

0:22:27.200 --> 0:22:29.520
<v Speaker 3>by someone else like the person performing the spell. I

0:22:29.520 --> 0:22:32.280
<v Speaker 3>couldn't quite tell from the text. But then yeah, it

0:22:32.320 --> 0:22:37.000
<v Speaker 3>says proof of scorpion cure confirmed, and Writtener cites another

0:22:37.080 --> 0:22:40.240
<v Speaker 3>spell curing scorpion sting that includes a recitation of a

0:22:40.400 --> 0:22:43.960
<v Speaker 3>myth of a wound received by a Nubis which was

0:22:44.000 --> 0:22:47.720
<v Speaker 3>cured by Isis, in which Isis tells a Nubis quote,

0:22:48.320 --> 0:22:51.119
<v Speaker 3>lick from your tongue to your heart, and vice versa,

0:22:51.560 --> 0:22:54.080
<v Speaker 3>up to the edges of the wound. Lick to the

0:22:54.160 --> 0:22:56.520
<v Speaker 3>edges of the wound, up to the limits of your strength.

0:22:56.880 --> 0:22:59.840
<v Speaker 3>What you shall lick, you shall swallow. Do not spit

0:22:59.880 --> 0:23:02.080
<v Speaker 3>it out on the ground. For your tongue is the

0:23:02.119 --> 0:23:05.280
<v Speaker 3>tongue of Shay, and your tongue is that of autumn.

0:23:06.400 --> 0:23:10.560
<v Speaker 3>And the patient benefiting from the spell, so is told

0:23:10.600 --> 0:23:14.080
<v Speaker 3>to quote, lick your wound with your tongue immediately while

0:23:14.080 --> 0:23:17.520
<v Speaker 3>it is still bleeding. And the patient here has become

0:23:17.600 --> 0:23:21.280
<v Speaker 3>identified with Anubis, who is at once a god, but

0:23:21.400 --> 0:23:26.400
<v Speaker 3>also in these reflections of natural observations observations of animals

0:23:26.400 --> 0:23:31.040
<v Speaker 3>in nature, is also a dog licking its wounds. Fascinating,

0:23:31.600 --> 0:23:35.360
<v Speaker 3>But it's also interesting how many of these spells advised

0:23:35.760 --> 0:23:41.320
<v Speaker 3>licking of a written spell to absorb or consume its power,

0:23:41.880 --> 0:23:43.800
<v Speaker 3>and that seems to come back to the belief that

0:23:44.160 --> 0:23:48.159
<v Speaker 3>words in themselves have power. It's not just like that

0:23:48.240 --> 0:23:52.520
<v Speaker 3>the word causes you to do something that gives the

0:23:52.560 --> 0:23:55.480
<v Speaker 3>spell power, but actually writing the spell or having some

0:23:55.640 --> 0:23:59.040
<v Speaker 3>kind of inscription on something on a linen or on

0:23:59.119 --> 0:24:02.720
<v Speaker 3>the body and then licking it can transfer the power

0:24:02.800 --> 0:24:05.840
<v Speaker 3>of the spell because you licked the words into you.

0:24:06.840 --> 0:24:13.160
<v Speaker 2>This is so fascinating because this really feels foreign from

0:24:13.480 --> 0:24:17.080
<v Speaker 2>at least the modern Western conception of various magics. You know,

0:24:17.240 --> 0:24:21.640
<v Speaker 2>this seems like something that, assuming I'm understanding it correctly,

0:24:21.720 --> 0:24:25.160
<v Speaker 2>is largely lost. It's possible I'm not thinking of some

0:24:25.560 --> 0:24:28.560
<v Speaker 2>more direct connection, so if anyone out there can think

0:24:28.600 --> 0:24:30.119
<v Speaker 2>of one, but yeah, I'm just trying to think of

0:24:30.160 --> 0:24:34.320
<v Speaker 2>any other system of magic, real or imagined, that has

0:24:34.359 --> 0:24:35.920
<v Speaker 2>involved something like this.

0:24:36.440 --> 0:24:39.360
<v Speaker 3>You eat the words by licking them, and the words

0:24:39.480 --> 0:24:42.160
<v Speaker 3>have the power, and the power goes into you when

0:24:42.160 --> 0:24:42.800
<v Speaker 3>you lick them.

0:24:43.280 --> 0:24:45.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean, I guess that. You know, there are

0:24:45.080 --> 0:24:48.760
<v Speaker 2>things involving, say the eating of pages, that sort of thing.

0:24:48.960 --> 0:24:51.320
<v Speaker 2>I can maybe think to some examples that get into

0:24:51.320 --> 0:24:54.840
<v Speaker 2>that area. But like the idea of something is is

0:24:54.880 --> 0:24:57.800
<v Speaker 2>printed on the skin and then that is licked off

0:24:57.840 --> 0:25:00.919
<v Speaker 2>of the skin and they're and lies the magic.

0:25:01.280 --> 0:25:05.720
<v Speaker 3>Yeah. Now, in addition to all of this protective licking, healing, licking,

0:25:05.840 --> 0:25:10.639
<v Speaker 3>blessings from licking, there is also offensive licking in Egyptian magic.

0:25:10.720 --> 0:25:13.640
<v Speaker 3>Because the hecka magic, as we talked about last month,

0:25:14.480 --> 0:25:17.000
<v Speaker 3>it was morally neutral in a way it could be

0:25:17.160 --> 0:25:20.040
<v Speaker 3>used to help or to harm than those were equally

0:25:20.160 --> 0:25:24.520
<v Speaker 3>legitimate uses for it. There are a bunch of texts

0:25:24.640 --> 0:25:28.840
<v Speaker 3>that describe licking in various sometimes obscure ways, as a

0:25:29.000 --> 0:25:32.919
<v Speaker 3>violent or offensive act. For example, the threat of being

0:25:33.040 --> 0:25:37.520
<v Speaker 3>licked by a venomous serpent. And you know, so there

0:25:37.520 --> 0:25:40.000
<v Speaker 3>are texts that talk about the serpent shall lick you,

0:25:40.119 --> 0:25:43.200
<v Speaker 3>and that's like a thing you don't want, in which

0:25:43.240 --> 0:25:46.719
<v Speaker 3>case I was kind of wondering if some uses of

0:25:47.080 --> 0:25:52.639
<v Speaker 3>licking by a serpent could be a case of observing

0:25:52.800 --> 0:25:57.120
<v Speaker 3>observing nature and watching the way that a snake will

0:25:57.160 --> 0:26:00.159
<v Speaker 3>flick its tongue in the air like and thinking that

0:26:00.200 --> 0:26:03.199
<v Speaker 3>a snake maybe deposits its venom with a lick of

0:26:03.240 --> 0:26:06.720
<v Speaker 3>the tongue rather than injection through a bite. This might

0:26:06.760 --> 0:26:09.879
<v Speaker 3>be a natural conclusion if you've seen a snake flicking

0:26:09.880 --> 0:26:12.560
<v Speaker 3>its tongue. And also I don't know of examples from

0:26:12.560 --> 0:26:15.639
<v Speaker 3>Age and Egypt that make this connection explicit, but at

0:26:15.680 --> 0:26:17.919
<v Speaker 3>lots of other times and places in history people have

0:26:18.040 --> 0:26:21.240
<v Speaker 3>thought this. This is a common belief throughout different cultures

0:26:21.280 --> 0:26:24.639
<v Speaker 3>and times that people think that the snake delivers venom

0:26:24.720 --> 0:26:26.480
<v Speaker 3>with its tongue.

0:26:27.160 --> 0:26:29.639
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean, well, they are very tongue forward in

0:26:29.680 --> 0:26:31.119
<v Speaker 2>their presentation. Yeah.

0:26:31.160 --> 0:26:33.199
<v Speaker 3>And actually this led into I wanted to do a

0:26:33.200 --> 0:26:37.160
<v Speaker 3>brief scientific aside on why do snakes actually flick their tongues?

0:26:37.960 --> 0:26:40.360
<v Speaker 3>So I was reading a few things. There's one very

0:26:40.359 --> 0:26:44.280
<v Speaker 3>good overview explainer on the research here, hosted on the

0:26:44.320 --> 0:26:48.840
<v Speaker 3>Conversation by a herpetologist named Andrew Durso from twenty fourteen,

0:26:48.960 --> 0:26:52.159
<v Speaker 3>called why do snakes flick their tongues? People have wondered

0:26:52.160 --> 0:26:54.680
<v Speaker 3>about this for ages. Again, there are many people who

0:26:54.720 --> 0:26:59.159
<v Speaker 3>thought that the tongue is the thing that delivers venom. Also,

0:26:59.320 --> 0:27:03.360
<v Speaker 3>some writers from the seventeenth century even positive that snakes

0:27:03.359 --> 0:27:06.520
<v Speaker 3>would use their the forked tips of their tongues like

0:27:06.600 --> 0:27:09.320
<v Speaker 3>pincers to catch prey, you know, like tweezers that come

0:27:09.320 --> 0:27:11.359
<v Speaker 3>out of the mouth and snatch them. That, as far

0:27:11.359 --> 0:27:14.800
<v Speaker 3>as we know, that's not true. In reality, the snake's

0:27:14.840 --> 0:27:19.800
<v Speaker 3>tongue is part of a highly developed chemosensory system for

0:27:20.000 --> 0:27:23.720
<v Speaker 3>detecting molecules in the air and along the substrate of

0:27:23.760 --> 0:27:27.959
<v Speaker 3>the ground, revealing the presence of important things to the snake,

0:27:28.240 --> 0:27:32.240
<v Speaker 3>like prey or a potential mate. The closest analogy in

0:27:32.320 --> 0:27:36.040
<v Speaker 3>human senses would be taste and smell, though those might

0:27:36.080 --> 0:27:40.640
<v Speaker 3>give you the incorrect idea that the flicking tongue itself

0:27:40.840 --> 0:27:44.840
<v Speaker 3>is the organ that tastes or smells the chemical signatures,

0:27:45.200 --> 0:27:48.639
<v Speaker 3>and it is not. The chemical sensing organ is actually

0:27:48.680 --> 0:27:51.879
<v Speaker 3>located on the roof of the snake's mouth, and it

0:27:51.920 --> 0:27:56.960
<v Speaker 3>is called the vomeronasal system or Jacobsen's organ. Research has

0:27:57.040 --> 0:28:00.440
<v Speaker 3>shown that what generally happens when the snake flick its

0:28:00.480 --> 0:28:03.479
<v Speaker 3>tongue out to lick the air or the ground. Is

0:28:03.520 --> 0:28:07.680
<v Speaker 3>that the tongue acts like a flypaper trap for chemical signature.

0:28:07.760 --> 0:28:09.960
<v Speaker 3>Is it goes out and it touches the ground or

0:28:09.960 --> 0:28:13.840
<v Speaker 3>whips around in the air, and then molecules along the

0:28:13.880 --> 0:28:16.640
<v Speaker 3>ground are suspended in the air stick to the tongue.

0:28:17.119 --> 0:28:20.160
<v Speaker 3>The tongue brings the molecules back into the mouth when

0:28:20.160 --> 0:28:24.760
<v Speaker 3>it retracts, and it somehow delivers them to the Jacobson's organ.

0:28:25.240 --> 0:28:27.320
<v Speaker 3>And this article it was talking about at least in

0:28:27.359 --> 0:28:29.680
<v Speaker 3>some snakes, the way it works is the tongue comes

0:28:29.720 --> 0:28:33.479
<v Speaker 3>in and it deposits those molecules on pads on the

0:28:33.520 --> 0:28:36.880
<v Speaker 3>floor of the mouth cavity, and then these pads then

0:28:36.920 --> 0:28:40.480
<v Speaker 3>deliver the molecules to the sensitive cells in the Jacobson's

0:28:40.560 --> 0:28:42.640
<v Speaker 3>organ on the roof of the mouth when the snake

0:28:42.720 --> 0:28:43.720
<v Speaker 3>closes its jaw.

0:28:44.480 --> 0:28:47.720
<v Speaker 2>We talked a little bit about the Jacobson organ in

0:28:47.800 --> 0:28:50.640
<v Speaker 2>our episodes on Urine last year. Yeah, I think it

0:28:50.680 --> 0:28:54.680
<v Speaker 2>was last year, in the last year or so, and yeah,

0:28:54.760 --> 0:28:58.120
<v Speaker 2>we talked about it's like the stinky kitty face and

0:28:58.160 --> 0:29:02.480
<v Speaker 2>so forth, and so the seeming lack of a system

0:29:02.560 --> 0:29:05.600
<v Speaker 2>like this in human beings, or at least contemporary human beings.

0:29:05.760 --> 0:29:10.960
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, so the Jacobsen's organ is of vastly different levels

0:29:10.960 --> 0:29:14.160
<v Speaker 3>of importance to different animals. For snakes, it's highly important

0:29:14.200 --> 0:29:17.680
<v Speaker 3>because a lot of snakes have these really sensitive, well

0:29:17.760 --> 0:29:21.040
<v Speaker 3>developed chemical sensing powers, and they need them in order

0:29:21.080 --> 0:29:25.040
<v Speaker 3>to hunt and to mate. One interesting thing about the

0:29:25.080 --> 0:29:27.959
<v Speaker 3>way the snake uses its tongue to sense chemical signatures

0:29:28.600 --> 0:29:33.200
<v Speaker 3>is that it can even detect differences in the relative

0:29:33.280 --> 0:29:37.760
<v Speaker 3>density of smells across three dimensions. This is at least

0:29:37.800 --> 0:29:40.320
<v Speaker 3>in part what the fork of the tongue is for.

0:29:40.840 --> 0:29:44.280
<v Speaker 3>So when the snake sticks its tongue out, the tips

0:29:44.320 --> 0:29:48.440
<v Speaker 3>of the forked tongue spread apart, and that creates a

0:29:48.480 --> 0:29:52.040
<v Speaker 3>stereo signal. So if they detect that the smell trail

0:29:52.120 --> 0:29:55.280
<v Speaker 3>they're following, maybe a male copperhead is trying to follow

0:29:55.320 --> 0:29:58.080
<v Speaker 3>the trail of a female so it can mate. If

0:29:58.080 --> 0:30:00.640
<v Speaker 3>it detects that the smell trail is stronger on the

0:30:00.720 --> 0:30:03.560
<v Speaker 3>left tip, the snake will turn its head to the

0:30:03.640 --> 0:30:06.880
<v Speaker 3>left and adjust course to follow the scent more directly,

0:30:07.560 --> 0:30:09.760
<v Speaker 3>kind of like how we can use the stereo signal

0:30:09.800 --> 0:30:13.400
<v Speaker 3>from our two ears to locate the directional origin of sounds.

0:30:14.120 --> 0:30:18.520
<v Speaker 3>Another interesting thing is that some snakes have venom that

0:30:18.680 --> 0:30:24.400
<v Speaker 3>is specially evolved to work together with their vomor nasal system.

0:30:24.720 --> 0:30:28.880
<v Speaker 3>For example, ambush predators these snakes that bite prey and

0:30:28.920 --> 0:30:31.040
<v Speaker 3>then wait for that prey to run away and die

0:30:31.080 --> 0:30:35.000
<v Speaker 3>before eating. Presumably this helps them avoid struggling with prey

0:30:35.000 --> 0:30:38.160
<v Speaker 3>that might fight back in some way. So you've got,

0:30:38.200 --> 0:30:41.720
<v Speaker 3>of course, the directly harmful paralyzing compounds in the venom,

0:30:41.720 --> 0:30:44.880
<v Speaker 3>But this venom also has stuff in it that is

0:30:45.120 --> 0:30:48.920
<v Speaker 3>easy for the snake to smell. It's like putting a

0:30:48.960 --> 0:30:53.080
<v Speaker 3>little stinky tracer into your bite, so that later the

0:30:53.080 --> 0:30:56.600
<v Speaker 3>predator can follow the scent of the envenomed prey to

0:30:56.680 --> 0:30:59.239
<v Speaker 3>the place where it collapses, and then the snake can

0:30:59.280 --> 0:30:59.960
<v Speaker 3>feast at its.

0:30:59.840 --> 0:31:01.720
<v Speaker 2>Life like a tracker.

0:31:01.840 --> 0:31:05.760
<v Speaker 3>Yeah yeah, but what about so that's you know why

0:31:05.800 --> 0:31:08.320
<v Speaker 3>you got the fork, and how what the snake is

0:31:08.400 --> 0:31:11.920
<v Speaker 3>using its tongue for. But what about that rapid flicking

0:31:11.920 --> 0:31:14.240
<v Speaker 3>of the tongue motion we've all seen. So snake sticks

0:31:14.240 --> 0:31:15.840
<v Speaker 3>its tongue out, and it doesn't just go out and

0:31:15.880 --> 0:31:18.800
<v Speaker 3>then back in. Sometimes it goes out and then just

0:31:18.960 --> 0:31:22.160
<v Speaker 3>like vibrates all over the place, flicks up and down rapidly.

0:31:22.240 --> 0:31:25.720
<v Speaker 3>What is that for? It seems this is a trick

0:31:25.800 --> 0:31:31.520
<v Speaker 3>to help increase the collection of volatile molecules. It by

0:31:31.520 --> 0:31:35.360
<v Speaker 3>flicking back and forth rapidly, the snake's tongue creates vortices

0:31:35.440 --> 0:31:39.360
<v Speaker 3>in the air, basically stirring the air up to expose

0:31:39.480 --> 0:31:42.600
<v Speaker 3>the surface area of the tongue to more air volume

0:31:42.840 --> 0:31:46.160
<v Speaker 3>and thus more volatile molecules. Kind Of like I was

0:31:46.160 --> 0:31:49.000
<v Speaker 3>trying to think of an analogy. Imagine you've got a

0:31:49.000 --> 0:31:52.520
<v Speaker 3>bunch of styrofoam packing peanuts floating in a bath tub

0:31:53.000 --> 0:31:55.920
<v Speaker 3>and you're trying to collect them with a sticky rod.

0:31:56.520 --> 0:31:58.920
<v Speaker 3>You would collect a lot more of them by sticking

0:31:59.000 --> 0:32:01.800
<v Speaker 3>the rod into the bath and vigorously stirring it up

0:32:02.000 --> 0:32:05.040
<v Speaker 3>instead of just doing a simple like dip in and out.

0:32:05.840 --> 0:32:06.840
<v Speaker 2>Okay, that makes sense.

0:32:07.120 --> 0:32:11.640
<v Speaker 3>So anyway, side quest over on the snake tongue science.

0:32:11.840 --> 0:32:14.800
<v Speaker 3>Coming back to magical licking for just a moment. There's

0:32:14.880 --> 0:32:19.000
<v Speaker 3>also the idea of offensive spell. So that came from

0:32:19.040 --> 0:32:21.080
<v Speaker 3>the idea that you know, a snake could, maybe a

0:32:21.120 --> 0:32:24.280
<v Speaker 3>serpent could harm you by licking. But I also wanted

0:32:24.320 --> 0:32:28.000
<v Speaker 3>to talk about the horrifying idea of magical licks from

0:32:28.000 --> 0:32:34.000
<v Speaker 3>a deadly crocodile or of other malevolent actors in the afterlife,

0:32:34.080 --> 0:32:39.240
<v Speaker 3>especially which can be attacks in themselves or could remove

0:32:39.440 --> 0:32:44.040
<v Speaker 3>your most important spells for the afterlife. So Writtener lists

0:32:44.080 --> 0:32:46.760
<v Speaker 3>a number of passages from the Coffin texts and from

0:32:46.760 --> 0:32:50.000
<v Speaker 3>the Book of the Dead which invoke the terrible threat

0:32:50.040 --> 0:32:52.720
<v Speaker 3>of licking as a way to attack and remove the

0:32:53.200 --> 0:32:56.800
<v Speaker 3>protection of the deceased. Just a few of these different passages.

0:32:57.160 --> 0:33:01.400
<v Speaker 3>One of them is, as for any God, goddess, spirit,

0:33:01.680 --> 0:33:04.600
<v Speaker 3>dead man, or dead woman who shall lick off his

0:33:04.720 --> 0:33:09.160
<v Speaker 3>spell against me today, he shall fall to the execution blocks,

0:33:09.400 --> 0:33:12.080
<v Speaker 3>to the magic that is in my body, the terrible

0:33:12.120 --> 0:33:15.320
<v Speaker 3>flames that are in my mouth. Okay, so that's a

0:33:15.400 --> 0:33:17.680
<v Speaker 3>kind of curse. That's saying you're gonna try to lick

0:33:17.720 --> 0:33:21.560
<v Speaker 3>my spells off, you're gonna get it. And then it's

0:33:21.560 --> 0:33:24.600
<v Speaker 3>funny that one of the threats is almost sounds like

0:33:24.640 --> 0:33:27.640
<v Speaker 3>it doesn't say the word licking, but the counter threat

0:33:27.720 --> 0:33:29.920
<v Speaker 3>is the terrible flames that are in my mouth. Sounds

0:33:29.960 --> 0:33:32.600
<v Speaker 3>like a threat to lick, lick with fire. Another one

0:33:32.600 --> 0:33:35.160
<v Speaker 3>of these quotes, as for any god or dead man

0:33:35.200 --> 0:33:37.920
<v Speaker 3>who shall lick off his spell in my presence. On

0:33:37.960 --> 0:33:41.520
<v Speaker 3>this day he shall fall to the depths. And then

0:33:41.600 --> 0:33:44.800
<v Speaker 3>another one back, Oh crocodile who is in the west,

0:33:45.240 --> 0:33:48.000
<v Speaker 3>For there is a serpent in this my belly. I

0:33:48.040 --> 0:33:50.480
<v Speaker 3>shall not be given to you. You shall not lick

0:33:50.520 --> 0:33:51.440
<v Speaker 3>off my spell.

0:33:51.880 --> 0:33:53.760
<v Speaker 2>Oh wow, So I thought this was just.

0:33:53.720 --> 0:33:57.720
<v Speaker 3>Such interesting imagery, the terror at the idea of licking

0:33:57.760 --> 0:34:00.800
<v Speaker 3>off of spells by the crocodile or by some other

0:34:00.960 --> 0:34:05.840
<v Speaker 3>evil actor as a grave threat to the deceased. Sometimes

0:34:06.560 --> 0:34:10.799
<v Speaker 3>the phrasing is kind of ambiguous in that I'm not

0:34:10.840 --> 0:34:15.000
<v Speaker 3>sure whose spell it is saying that the offender is

0:34:15.040 --> 0:34:17.319
<v Speaker 3>licking off. Sometimes it's clearly saying like, you're not going

0:34:17.400 --> 0:34:20.480
<v Speaker 3>to lick off my spells, But then other times it's

0:34:20.480 --> 0:34:23.000
<v Speaker 3>saying like, if you try to lick off your spell

0:34:23.280 --> 0:34:26.239
<v Speaker 3>or lick off somebody else's spell, that's really danger. I

0:34:26.280 --> 0:34:30.920
<v Speaker 3>wonder then if it's like a threat against you trying

0:34:30.920 --> 0:34:33.879
<v Speaker 3>to power up by licking your own spell to give

0:34:33.880 --> 0:34:36.879
<v Speaker 3>you power against me. I couldn't quite tell exactly what that.

0:34:36.920 --> 0:34:39.319
<v Speaker 2>Means, Like I will lick your spell before you can

0:34:39.360 --> 0:34:41.800
<v Speaker 2>lick it and cast it at me. Yeah, So clearly

0:34:41.840 --> 0:34:45.879
<v Speaker 2>this needs to be developed into a magical system for

0:34:46.320 --> 0:34:47.600
<v Speaker 2>modern role playing games.

0:34:47.800 --> 0:34:50.560
<v Speaker 3>Yeah. Yeah, so I admit that I don't fully understand

0:34:50.600 --> 0:34:52.920
<v Speaker 3>exactly what's being talked about in some of these texts,

0:34:52.960 --> 0:34:55.360
<v Speaker 3>but in some of them it's, oh, it's so interesting.

0:34:55.440 --> 0:34:58.919
<v Speaker 3>Just like the lick of the crocodile could itself, I think,

0:34:59.000 --> 0:35:02.560
<v Speaker 3>be envisioned as an attack on its own. That's just like,

0:35:02.719 --> 0:35:05.000
<v Speaker 3>you know, it's like the crocodile kind of moving to

0:35:05.160 --> 0:35:10.080
<v Speaker 3>devour you. The lick is some part of that action,

0:35:10.600 --> 0:35:14.360
<v Speaker 3>but also the specific threat of licking off of spells

0:35:14.480 --> 0:35:17.640
<v Speaker 3>is a hostile act by which the crocodile removes the

0:35:17.719 --> 0:35:21.800
<v Speaker 3>dead person's magical armor. So in the end of this section,

0:35:21.840 --> 0:35:25.560
<v Speaker 3>Writtener writes, quote where licking serves primarily to transfer saliva,

0:35:25.719 --> 0:35:28.440
<v Speaker 3>it is but a variant of ritual spitting, and maybe

0:35:28.440 --> 0:35:32.520
<v Speaker 3>construed as a blessing cure or curse. So that's one mechanism,

0:35:32.560 --> 0:35:35.359
<v Speaker 3>the transfer of saliva. But the other is quote where

0:35:35.400 --> 0:35:39.080
<v Speaker 3>licking serves primarily as a means of consumption. However, it

0:35:39.160 --> 0:35:42.920
<v Speaker 3>is but a variant of ritual swallowing, employed either to

0:35:43.280 --> 0:35:48.960
<v Speaker 3>ingest divine force or to devour hostile figures. And this

0:35:49.080 --> 0:35:53.520
<v Speaker 3>kind of just by association got me thinking about another

0:35:53.719 --> 0:35:56.600
<v Speaker 3>kind of offensive licking, not at all related to ancient

0:35:56.600 --> 0:35:58.759
<v Speaker 3>Egyptian magic, though I don't know, maybe some of the

0:35:58.760 --> 0:36:01.920
<v Speaker 3>same intuitions are at work, who knows. I was thinking

0:36:01.960 --> 0:36:08.440
<v Speaker 3>about when kids lick something to form an attack, to

0:36:08.640 --> 0:36:14.960
<v Speaker 3>intentionally contaminate that object, to claim ownership or deny access

0:36:15.040 --> 0:36:18.839
<v Speaker 3>to another child. Sometimes I think this is done to say, like,

0:36:18.920 --> 0:36:21.080
<v Speaker 3>this object is mine, I'm gonna lick it, like I'm

0:36:21.080 --> 0:36:23.480
<v Speaker 3>gonna lick this food so you don't eat the food.

0:36:23.880 --> 0:36:26.439
<v Speaker 2>Classic example being like a roll, or like a dinner

0:36:26.520 --> 0:36:27.360
<v Speaker 2>roll at a table.

0:36:27.640 --> 0:36:30.799
<v Speaker 3>Yes, or sometimes so. Sometimes it's like claiming like this

0:36:30.880 --> 0:36:32.600
<v Speaker 3>is for me, don't you mess with it because I'm

0:36:32.600 --> 0:36:35.239
<v Speaker 3>gonna lick it. But a lot of times it's done,

0:36:35.320 --> 0:36:40.520
<v Speaker 3>apparently just to annoy or provoke another child on purpose,

0:36:40.680 --> 0:36:44.360
<v Speaker 3>like licking your siblings dinner role or licking your siblings

0:36:44.480 --> 0:36:47.319
<v Speaker 3>ice cream cone, or even not non foods, licking their

0:36:47.360 --> 0:36:49.799
<v Speaker 3>toy as a provocation. Do you remember this?

0:36:50.360 --> 0:36:56.319
<v Speaker 2>No, I remember the dinner roll sort of situation, But yeah,

0:36:56.400 --> 0:36:59.359
<v Speaker 2>not so. I mean, you know kids do this sort

0:36:59.360 --> 0:37:01.240
<v Speaker 2>of thing, but I don't have a lot of direct

0:37:01.280 --> 0:37:02.000
<v Speaker 2>experience with it.

0:37:02.360 --> 0:37:04.560
<v Speaker 3>Okay, Well, anyway, I was wondering if there was any

0:37:04.600 --> 0:37:08.080
<v Speaker 3>research in psychology or child development on this. I went looking.

0:37:08.440 --> 0:37:13.480
<v Speaker 3>I couldn't find anything directly investigating the practice of intentionally

0:37:13.560 --> 0:37:16.520
<v Speaker 3>licking things, either to inflict harm or annoyance or to

0:37:16.520 --> 0:37:20.200
<v Speaker 3>claim them. But I did find a peripherally related study.

0:37:20.280 --> 0:37:25.759
<v Speaker 3>This was by Jasmine DeJesus, Kristin Schutz, and Catherine Kinsler,

0:37:26.400 --> 0:37:30.000
<v Speaker 3>published in the journal Appetite in twenty fifteen called ew

0:37:30.160 --> 0:37:35.360
<v Speaker 3>She Sneezed. Contamination context affects children's food preferences and consumption.

0:37:36.719 --> 0:37:38.480
<v Speaker 3>This is kind of funny. So the study looked into

0:37:38.480 --> 0:37:43.839
<v Speaker 3>the question how does a child's understanding of contamination in

0:37:43.960 --> 0:37:49.360
<v Speaker 3>food develop and how does contextual information about the life

0:37:49.440 --> 0:37:53.440
<v Speaker 3>history of a piece of food affect a child's disgust reaction,

0:37:53.640 --> 0:37:56.400
<v Speaker 3>like apart from qualities of appearance or taste in the

0:37:56.440 --> 0:38:00.880
<v Speaker 3>food itself. So to study this, the researchers looked at

0:38:00.960 --> 0:38:03.839
<v Speaker 3>children between the ages of three and eight, and they

0:38:03.880 --> 0:38:07.759
<v Speaker 3>presented them with identical food items. The only difference was

0:38:07.800 --> 0:38:10.680
<v Speaker 3>that one was the control where nothing had happened to it,

0:38:10.760 --> 0:38:14.200
<v Speaker 3>and the other, while the food item was exactly the same,

0:38:14.880 --> 0:38:17.319
<v Speaker 3>was given a story with a visual aid which is

0:38:17.560 --> 0:38:21.040
<v Speaker 3>somebody licked the spoon you have to use to eat this.

0:38:21.840 --> 0:38:24.920
<v Speaker 3>And then they also tested somebody sneezed on the bowl

0:38:25.160 --> 0:38:27.799
<v Speaker 3>in which this is served. They didn't really do this,

0:38:27.920 --> 0:38:30.720
<v Speaker 3>there was some trickery involved, but they made the children

0:38:30.880 --> 0:38:32.759
<v Speaker 3>think the spoon had been licked or the bull had

0:38:32.760 --> 0:38:36.200
<v Speaker 3>been sneezed on and the author's rite quote. When given

0:38:36.200 --> 0:38:38.799
<v Speaker 3>the opportunity to eat the foods, five to eight year

0:38:38.840 --> 0:38:42.920
<v Speaker 3>old children consumed more clean food and rated the clean

0:38:42.960 --> 0:38:47.440
<v Speaker 3>food's taste more positively. Younger children did not distinguish between

0:38:47.520 --> 0:38:52.080
<v Speaker 3>the foods. The relation between contamination and subjective taste held

0:38:52.160 --> 0:38:55.840
<v Speaker 3>even among children who ate both foods and had direct

0:38:55.960 --> 0:38:59.640
<v Speaker 3>evidence that they were identical. So, yeah, I thought it

0:38:59.680 --> 0:39:02.400
<v Speaker 3>was kind of interesting. Like, three year olds, on average,

0:39:02.440 --> 0:39:04.799
<v Speaker 3>at least in this sample, don't seem to much care

0:39:04.960 --> 0:39:08.080
<v Speaker 3>if food is contaminated with a spoon somebody else's licked,

0:39:08.120 --> 0:39:11.080
<v Speaker 3>as long as it still appears yummy. But by ages

0:39:11.200 --> 0:39:16.920
<v Speaker 3>five to eight, we've got a psychological contamination reflex. Food

0:39:16.920 --> 0:39:20.279
<v Speaker 3>that has been contaminated by a licked spoon or is

0:39:20.320 --> 0:39:23.960
<v Speaker 3>served in a sneezed on bowl acquires this ick factor.

0:39:24.400 --> 0:39:27.439
<v Speaker 3>The kids desire to eat the food less, and when

0:39:27.440 --> 0:39:30.640
<v Speaker 3>they do eat it, they think it tastes worse, even

0:39:30.680 --> 0:39:33.840
<v Speaker 3>though they can sample both foods directly and there's actually

0:39:33.880 --> 0:39:37.120
<v Speaker 3>no difference. And so, of course, in my many, like

0:39:37.280 --> 0:39:39.799
<v Speaker 3>you know, wondering about parenting things, I have been thinking

0:39:39.800 --> 0:39:42.719
<v Speaker 3>about the different like trade offs in the development of

0:39:42.840 --> 0:39:46.880
<v Speaker 3>the disgust reaction, because it's clearly not that young children

0:39:47.200 --> 0:39:51.040
<v Speaker 3>fully lack a disgust reaction, Like young children will often

0:39:51.080 --> 0:39:54.799
<v Speaker 3>show disgust reactions to perfectly healthy, nutritious foods, but it's

0:39:54.840 --> 0:39:56.319
<v Speaker 3>just like I don't like, I don't want to eat

0:39:56.320 --> 0:39:59.040
<v Speaker 3>that vegetable. I don't know, no, no disgusting, you know,

0:39:59.440 --> 0:40:02.920
<v Speaker 3>instant disgust reaction to just the appearance or smell of

0:40:02.920 --> 0:40:04.200
<v Speaker 3>a food they haven't even tried.

0:40:04.960 --> 0:40:09.440
<v Speaker 2>I've heard it put before that some of this gets

0:40:09.440 --> 0:40:12.480
<v Speaker 2>down to the fact that if a child were to

0:40:12.520 --> 0:40:17.400
<v Speaker 2>eat something that we're toxic, their smaller bodies would make

0:40:17.400 --> 0:40:19.960
<v Speaker 2>them more susceptible to damage from said thing, and therefore

0:40:20.000 --> 0:40:24.279
<v Speaker 2>they're more susceptible to the ick factor. On top of that, though,

0:40:24.280 --> 0:40:26.319
<v Speaker 2>of course, there's a lot of room for just sort

0:40:26.320 --> 0:40:30.719
<v Speaker 2>of like additional social contamination, you know, like this is

0:40:30.760 --> 0:40:33.919
<v Speaker 2>like a personal pet peeve. But anytime I've encountered small

0:40:34.000 --> 0:40:37.160
<v Speaker 2>children who describe food they are presented with as disgusting,

0:40:38.520 --> 0:40:41.240
<v Speaker 2>and I mean a lot of that is just has learned,

0:40:41.960 --> 0:40:45.880
<v Speaker 2>like how do you how do you describe food that

0:40:45.960 --> 0:40:48.399
<v Speaker 2>you do not wish to eat? And so like, that's

0:40:48.440 --> 0:40:51.319
<v Speaker 2>something we always really hammered home. It's like, okay, it's

0:40:51.320 --> 0:40:54.000
<v Speaker 2>okay to not want to eat something, but you don't

0:40:54.000 --> 0:40:56.880
<v Speaker 2>describe it as disgusting or gross. You would say something like,

0:40:57.000 --> 0:40:59.239
<v Speaker 2>well that is not for me, or maybe you get

0:40:59.239 --> 0:41:01.319
<v Speaker 2>down to it, like why do I not like it?

0:41:01.360 --> 0:41:03.680
<v Speaker 2>Is it too spicy? Is there something in the texture

0:41:03.760 --> 0:41:06.680
<v Speaker 2>of it? And so forth? Is it too sour? Like?

0:41:07.000 --> 0:41:09.680
<v Speaker 2>There's so much more room to explore what's going on.

0:41:10.520 --> 0:41:12.200
<v Speaker 2>But when you know, they throw out the oh this

0:41:12.239 --> 0:41:15.160
<v Speaker 2>is gross or this is disgusting. Yeah, that's not going

0:41:15.200 --> 0:41:17.439
<v Speaker 2>to win win friends and influence people either.

0:41:17.880 --> 0:41:20.920
<v Speaker 3>But disgusting is an interesting descriptive word about food because

0:41:20.920 --> 0:41:24.400
<v Speaker 3>it doesn't actually refer to any objective qualities or inherent

0:41:24.480 --> 0:41:27.680
<v Speaker 3>qualities of the food itself. Disgusted is an emotion, so

0:41:27.719 --> 0:41:31.520
<v Speaker 3>it's just merely describing the child's own emotional reactions. I

0:41:31.800 --> 0:41:34.520
<v Speaker 3>totally am with you. And it's yeah, it's frustrating.

0:41:34.520 --> 0:41:34.880
<v Speaker 4>I don't know.

0:41:34.920 --> 0:41:39.200
<v Speaker 3>I feel like, you know, the adults in our household

0:41:39.239 --> 0:41:42.600
<v Speaker 3>are very non picky eaters and discovering that even if

0:41:42.640 --> 0:41:45.279
<v Speaker 3>you try to create the ultimate like you know, non

0:41:45.360 --> 0:41:48.120
<v Speaker 3>picky eating environment for a child, sometimes a child's just

0:41:48.160 --> 0:41:49.000
<v Speaker 3>going to be a picky eater.

0:41:49.120 --> 0:41:52.760
<v Speaker 2>Oh yeah, yeah, yeah. It's often out of your control. Yeah,

0:41:52.800 --> 0:41:53.640
<v Speaker 2>but we work at it.

0:41:53.960 --> 0:41:56.919
<v Speaker 3>Yeah yeah, but yeah, I totally understand what you're saying

0:41:56.920 --> 0:41:59.880
<v Speaker 3>about the it's frustrating to hear a child describe some

0:42:00.200 --> 0:42:02.520
<v Speaker 3>is disgusting, but yeah, that is a word that refers

0:42:02.560 --> 0:42:06.879
<v Speaker 3>to their own emotions. But anyway, yeah, I'm thinking about

0:42:06.880 --> 0:42:09.200
<v Speaker 3>the ways that these emotions trade off. So as a

0:42:09.280 --> 0:42:13.360
<v Speaker 3>child grows up, I think they a common pattern, it seems,

0:42:13.560 --> 0:42:18.520
<v Speaker 3>is that they lose a lot of the the pickiness

0:42:18.560 --> 0:42:21.520
<v Speaker 3>declines over time, and they will become more open to

0:42:21.600 --> 0:42:26.759
<v Speaker 3>trying different kinds of foods inherently, but that they acquire

0:42:26.920 --> 0:42:29.920
<v Speaker 3>new dimensions of the disgust reaction. And some of that

0:42:30.040 --> 0:42:34.440
<v Speaker 3>is based around knowledge of contamination of food by like

0:42:34.480 --> 0:42:36.960
<v Speaker 3>body fluids. So it's like if somebody licked this spoon,

0:42:37.080 --> 0:42:40.480
<v Speaker 3>now that's a disgust reaction and it makes the food yucky,

0:42:41.280 --> 0:42:42.319
<v Speaker 3>but I might still eat it.

0:42:43.600 --> 0:42:45.839
<v Speaker 2>I should also throw in that I've also heard it

0:42:45.920 --> 0:42:49.680
<v Speaker 2>put that. Another aspect in play here is that young

0:42:49.760 --> 0:42:52.319
<v Speaker 2>children often you know, do not have a lot of

0:42:52.400 --> 0:42:55.960
<v Speaker 2>choices that they can make in life, and a lot

0:42:55.960 --> 0:42:58.719
<v Speaker 2>of choices are made for them. But this becomes a

0:42:58.719 --> 0:43:02.080
<v Speaker 2>dimension where they have They often feel like they have

0:43:02.560 --> 0:43:04.880
<v Speaker 2>a great deal more power. Yeah, and that you know,

0:43:04.840 --> 0:43:07.160
<v Speaker 2>it may not be on an actual, like conscious level,

0:43:07.239 --> 0:43:09.600
<v Speaker 2>it's you know, maybe more subconscious, but it may be

0:43:09.640 --> 0:43:13.160
<v Speaker 2>in play in some of these scenarios. I guess adults

0:43:13.239 --> 0:43:16.400
<v Speaker 2>do sometimes lick food items to claim it, though I

0:43:16.400 --> 0:43:20.920
<v Speaker 2>think generally it's a way of intentionally acting childish, perhaps

0:43:20.920 --> 0:43:24.719
<v Speaker 2>for laughs, but there may be situations where someone is

0:43:24.719 --> 0:43:27.600
<v Speaker 2>actually employing this as a protected strategy for their food,

0:43:27.760 --> 0:43:31.560
<v Speaker 2>or in a very childish fashion offensively against people they

0:43:31.560 --> 0:43:31.960
<v Speaker 2>don't like.

0:43:32.560 --> 0:43:34.880
<v Speaker 3>It might be more subtle in the way the adult

0:43:34.920 --> 0:43:36.960
<v Speaker 3>does it. It's not like the eh and they like

0:43:37.160 --> 0:43:39.879
<v Speaker 3>the control, but they just kind of, you know, I'll

0:43:39.920 --> 0:43:42.160
<v Speaker 3>take one bite of this plate before walking away.

0:43:42.520 --> 0:43:44.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Generally, as an adult, you're going to find yourself

0:43:44.680 --> 0:43:48.080
<v Speaker 2>in a situation where I would imagine once food is

0:43:48.080 --> 0:43:50.000
<v Speaker 2>on your plate. It is safe, it is off limits

0:43:50.040 --> 0:43:52.719
<v Speaker 2>from other people taking it, but I don't know. It's

0:43:52.719 --> 0:43:54.719
<v Speaker 2>like some if there's only one of a particular bait

0:43:54.800 --> 0:43:57.360
<v Speaker 2>good and it's particularly nice that it might be different.

0:44:07.920 --> 0:44:10.719
<v Speaker 2>All Right. To close out this episode, I want to

0:44:10.760 --> 0:44:14.520
<v Speaker 2>turn to something that came to mind the second that

0:44:14.560 --> 0:44:18.640
<v Speaker 2>you proposed an episode on licking, and it concerns something

0:44:18.680 --> 0:44:22.200
<v Speaker 2>that in general, children have never had any problem licking,

0:44:22.920 --> 0:44:26.719
<v Speaker 2>and that is the Tutsi pop. Joe, I'm sure you

0:44:26.719 --> 0:44:28.560
<v Speaker 2>grew up with this candy as well. It's been around

0:44:28.600 --> 0:44:31.520
<v Speaker 2>for quite a while. This is, of course a Tutsi

0:44:31.640 --> 0:44:34.719
<v Speaker 2>roll that's a kind of chocolate chew candy. It's not

0:44:34.800 --> 0:44:37.880
<v Speaker 2>really chocolate per se, but it is. It's a chocolate

0:44:38.000 --> 0:44:40.920
<v Speaker 2>chew that has been entombed in the middle of a

0:44:40.920 --> 0:44:45.000
<v Speaker 2>hard candy sucker. This comes in different flavors. I think

0:44:45.040 --> 0:44:47.280
<v Speaker 2>the one I most remember is kind of an orange flavor.

0:44:47.880 --> 0:44:50.160
<v Speaker 2>And so they're kind of like the scorpion lollipops that

0:44:50.200 --> 0:44:53.080
<v Speaker 2>you see in Arizona, but instead of there being an

0:44:53.120 --> 0:44:56.279
<v Speaker 2>iraq knet at the center, there is a chunk of

0:44:56.640 --> 0:44:58.560
<v Speaker 2>like a glob of chocolate chewic wait.

0:44:58.600 --> 0:45:00.200
<v Speaker 3>I don't know about the scorpion LOLLI.

0:45:00.520 --> 0:45:02.719
<v Speaker 2>Oh yeah, I mean you see these outside Arizona, but

0:45:02.719 --> 0:45:05.400
<v Speaker 2>I mean it's like anytime I'm at the Sky Harbor

0:45:06.040 --> 0:45:08.759
<v Speaker 2>Airport in Phoenix, like you know, I have a few

0:45:08.760 --> 0:45:10.799
<v Speaker 2>minutes signed up, wandering into a gift shop and they

0:45:10.800 --> 0:45:14.000
<v Speaker 2>have all those these little brightly colored suckers and in

0:45:14.040 --> 0:45:16.960
<v Speaker 2>the middle there is an actual scorpion.

0:45:16.600 --> 0:45:19.880
<v Speaker 3>So you like, lick your tongue makes contact with the scorpion.

0:45:20.080 --> 0:45:22.920
<v Speaker 2>I don't know, I've never purchased one. I don't know

0:45:22.960 --> 0:45:25.640
<v Speaker 2>how much of it is. Just it's just the idea

0:45:25.719 --> 0:45:28.239
<v Speaker 2>of it is irresistible, so people get it. I don't

0:45:28.239 --> 0:45:30.160
<v Speaker 2>know what happens if you actually lick to the to

0:45:30.200 --> 0:45:33.319
<v Speaker 2>the center and get the scorpion, or or in some

0:45:33.440 --> 0:45:36.120
<v Speaker 2>other way get to the center. I have no idea,

0:45:36.440 --> 0:45:37.600
<v Speaker 2>but their eye catching.

0:45:37.480 --> 0:45:39.319
<v Speaker 3>Wow, well I've never heard of that does seem like

0:45:39.360 --> 0:45:42.960
<v Speaker 3>an inversion of the Tutsi role principle, because let me

0:45:43.040 --> 0:45:45.279
<v Speaker 3>run this by you. See what you think is the

0:45:45.320 --> 0:45:49.640
<v Speaker 3>idea of the Tutsi pop that the best part of

0:45:49.680 --> 0:45:51.919
<v Speaker 3>it is in the middle, and you got to work

0:45:51.960 --> 0:45:54.279
<v Speaker 3>through the outside to get down to the best part

0:45:54.440 --> 0:45:55.040
<v Speaker 3>in the middle.

0:45:55.840 --> 0:46:00.040
<v Speaker 2>This is a very hard question to answer, because I

0:46:00.120 --> 0:46:04.200
<v Speaker 2>vaguely remember as a child being far more into the

0:46:04.320 --> 0:46:07.440
<v Speaker 2>candy coating as opposed to the sinner. But I think

0:46:07.480 --> 0:46:09.880
<v Speaker 2>I ate the center as well. But then I know,

0:46:10.280 --> 0:46:14.120
<v Speaker 2>like children's taste of candy is is weird, Like like

0:46:14.280 --> 0:46:17.759
<v Speaker 2>there was a point where my kiddo's favorite candy, like

0:46:17.760 --> 0:46:19.799
<v Speaker 2>they got to choose which candy they got to keep

0:46:19.920 --> 0:46:22.239
<v Speaker 2>before the rest went to the switch witch. And there

0:46:22.280 --> 0:46:24.640
<v Speaker 2>was one year where they're like, I choose the Tutsie rolls.

0:46:25.040 --> 0:46:26.799
<v Speaker 2>And so it's like, you know, I don't know fair enough,

0:46:26.840 --> 0:46:31.800
<v Speaker 2>Like you're in different taste sensations that they've since it evolved,

0:46:31.800 --> 0:46:34.400
<v Speaker 2>So now they're more they're more of a dark chocolate

0:46:36.640 --> 0:46:39.719
<v Speaker 2>enjoyer as opposed to a Tutsi roll enjoyer. So you

0:46:39.760 --> 0:46:41.399
<v Speaker 2>know it changes over time.

0:46:42.480 --> 0:46:47.160
<v Speaker 3>Sophisticated now, yeah, but that would be It's funny. I

0:46:47.239 --> 0:46:49.600
<v Speaker 3>just had a very similar experience of my child this year.

0:46:49.640 --> 0:46:51.520
<v Speaker 3>We did switchwich for the first time. This is our

0:46:51.520 --> 0:46:54.399
<v Speaker 3>first real trick or treating year, and yeah, we did

0:46:54.440 --> 0:46:58.240
<v Speaker 3>switch witch and she kept only the most disgusting candies.

0:46:59.280 --> 0:47:02.200
<v Speaker 3>I think they were based on the colorfulness of the rapper,

0:47:02.320 --> 0:47:05.520
<v Speaker 3>which tends to correspond with the actually least good candy.

0:47:05.760 --> 0:47:08.400
<v Speaker 2>Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, there's a lot of bad stuff

0:47:08.400 --> 0:47:11.120
<v Speaker 2>out there. I don't even know if Tutsi rolls were

0:47:11.200 --> 0:47:14.320
<v Speaker 2>necessarily made. I mean surely Tutsi rolls were out there

0:47:14.560 --> 0:47:17.720
<v Speaker 2>in circulation, and I assume Tutsi pops as well, because

0:47:18.040 --> 0:47:21.400
<v Speaker 2>they were definitely in circulation when I was triggered treating

0:47:21.440 --> 0:47:24.360
<v Speaker 2>back when I was a kid. So just to refresh,

0:47:24.400 --> 0:47:27.800
<v Speaker 2>the tutsi roll itself is an eighteen ninety six invention,

0:47:28.280 --> 0:47:30.600
<v Speaker 2>and I think that probably matches up with sort of

0:47:30.680 --> 0:47:34.400
<v Speaker 2>like the chocolate chew aspect of the thing. If you

0:47:34.600 --> 0:47:37.239
<v Speaker 2>were to have a tutsi role today, and maybe you're

0:47:37.280 --> 0:47:40.440
<v Speaker 2>having one right now, I think it does feel like

0:47:40.440 --> 0:47:45.040
<v Speaker 2>a classic candy in this regard. The Tutsi pop, however,

0:47:45.200 --> 0:47:48.360
<v Speaker 2>was a nineteen thirty one innovation. To put that in

0:47:48.440 --> 0:47:51.200
<v Speaker 2>cinematic terms, that is the year that the original Boris

0:47:51.280 --> 0:47:59.560
<v Speaker 2>Carlos Frankenstein movie came out coincidence, and then it's much

0:48:00.040 --> 0:48:03.920
<v Speaker 2>later though, in nineteen sixty nine, the year Frankenstein Must

0:48:03.960 --> 0:48:07.560
<v Speaker 2>Be Destroyed comes out the hammer picture that we get

0:48:08.080 --> 0:48:12.600
<v Speaker 2>what is probably one of, if not the most famous

0:48:13.120 --> 0:48:15.799
<v Speaker 2>TV ad campaigns of all time, and I would also

0:48:15.880 --> 0:48:21.120
<v Speaker 2>argue one of the best commercials of all time. I

0:48:21.160 --> 0:48:23.920
<v Speaker 2>think everyone can. I think everyone out there has probably

0:48:23.920 --> 0:48:25.920
<v Speaker 2>seen this. If you haven't, just go to YouTube or

0:48:26.080 --> 0:48:30.640
<v Speaker 2>anywhere you will find video of this classic commercial. This

0:48:30.760 --> 0:48:32.799
<v Speaker 2>is the how many licks does it take to get

0:48:33.040 --> 0:48:36.800
<v Speaker 2>to the tutsi role center of a Tutsi pop commercial.

0:48:37.000 --> 0:48:38.880
<v Speaker 3>I don't know how I would be wrong about this

0:48:38.960 --> 0:48:42.040
<v Speaker 3>that I'm wondering if I am wrong. I have memories

0:48:42.680 --> 0:48:45.880
<v Speaker 3>of being a kid in the not the late sixties

0:48:45.960 --> 0:48:48.880
<v Speaker 3>or seventies. I have memories of being a child in

0:48:48.920 --> 0:48:52.800
<v Speaker 3>the eighties and nineties and still seeing this original commercial airing.

0:48:52.840 --> 0:48:55.000
<v Speaker 3>Do they just run the same commercial for decades?

0:48:55.200 --> 0:48:58.760
<v Speaker 2>Yeah? It is often presented that this is the longest

0:48:58.800 --> 0:49:02.720
<v Speaker 2>running televisionmercial of all time, and that's of course difficult

0:49:02.719 --> 0:49:05.840
<v Speaker 2>to impossible to actually quantify, but it might be true,

0:49:06.040 --> 0:49:10.800
<v Speaker 2>Like it is across multiple generations. People have seen this ad,

0:49:11.239 --> 0:49:14.080
<v Speaker 2>and I think legitimately is a testament to just how

0:49:14.120 --> 0:49:16.840
<v Speaker 2>good it is. Like it is just almost a perfect

0:49:16.880 --> 0:49:17.600
<v Speaker 2>ad campaign.

0:49:18.200 --> 0:49:21.160
<v Speaker 3>Okay, so wait for people who have never actually seen it,

0:49:21.200 --> 0:49:22.120
<v Speaker 3>how does this ad go?

0:49:22.320 --> 0:49:24.640
<v Speaker 2>All? Right? So it's brilliant. It's presented in the form

0:49:24.680 --> 0:49:28.000
<v Speaker 2>of a fable in which a young boy brings this

0:49:28.160 --> 0:49:31.600
<v Speaker 2>particular conundrum to a series of talking animals, first a cow,

0:49:31.760 --> 0:49:34.200
<v Speaker 2>then a fox and turtle, and finally a wise owl.

0:49:34.840 --> 0:49:37.799
<v Speaker 2>The child is wondering how many licks does it take

0:49:37.880 --> 0:49:41.640
<v Speaker 2>to get to the center of this TUTSI pop And

0:49:42.960 --> 0:49:45.560
<v Speaker 2>before I get into describing what happens, and I do

0:49:45.600 --> 0:49:47.360
<v Speaker 2>want to just mention a little bit about the behind

0:49:47.360 --> 0:49:51.080
<v Speaker 2>the scenes here because it's pretty interesting. It was directed

0:49:51.080 --> 0:49:56.799
<v Speaker 2>by Jimmy T. Murakami, American Irish animator of Japanese American heritage,

0:49:56.840 --> 0:49:59.720
<v Speaker 2>who directed a segment of nineteen eighty one's Heavy Metal

0:50:00.200 --> 0:50:03.720
<v Speaker 2>and nineteen eighties Battle Beyond the Stars, which we've discussed

0:50:03.760 --> 0:50:05.839
<v Speaker 2>on in depth on Weird House Cinema.

0:50:06.000 --> 0:50:09.279
<v Speaker 3>Oh, Okay, Battle Beyond was that the Roger Corman Star

0:50:09.320 --> 0:50:13.080
<v Speaker 3>Wars ripoff. Yes, yeah, okay, the good one Yeah.

0:50:13.120 --> 0:50:16.920
<v Speaker 2>And then among the vocal talents involved, it featured the

0:50:16.960 --> 0:50:20.560
<v Speaker 2>prolific Paul Freese mister Fox. He does a voice of

0:50:20.600 --> 0:50:24.320
<v Speaker 2>mister Fox here. Paul Freese has his voice and sometimes

0:50:24.320 --> 0:50:26.840
<v Speaker 2>his physical performance have shown up in multiple films that

0:50:26.880 --> 0:50:29.040
<v Speaker 2>we've talked about on a Weird House, like When You

0:50:29.080 --> 0:50:31.240
<v Speaker 2>Go to Letterbox dot Com and look at the stats

0:50:31.239 --> 0:50:33.799
<v Speaker 2>for the movies we've covered, Paul Freeze is up there

0:50:34.160 --> 0:50:36.759
<v Speaker 2>in appearing in the most titles that we've covered, just

0:50:37.080 --> 0:50:39.520
<v Speaker 2>sort of incidentally because you just did a lot of

0:50:39.520 --> 0:50:42.719
<v Speaker 2>bit parts and voices. But then you also have in

0:50:42.760 --> 0:50:50.080
<v Speaker 2>this voicing the wise owl, legendary ventriloquist Paul Winschell. He

0:50:50.160 --> 0:50:53.080
<v Speaker 2>was the original tigger voice, for example, So he's doing

0:50:53.120 --> 0:50:55.880
<v Speaker 2>the owl voice. And the short itself was written by

0:50:55.960 --> 0:51:00.880
<v Speaker 2>ad wizard Jerry Bernstein and looked into him a little bit,

0:51:00.920 --> 0:51:03.680
<v Speaker 2>and he's He's was a big name, and part of

0:51:03.719 --> 0:51:06.960
<v Speaker 2>his legendary status was this campaign. Like this is almost

0:51:07.040 --> 0:51:11.040
<v Speaker 2>like this is like a Madman like level successful ad

0:51:11.080 --> 0:51:14.799
<v Speaker 2>campaign like it again, survived for decades and still has

0:51:14.880 --> 0:51:16.560
<v Speaker 2>cultural reach and importance today.

0:51:16.800 --> 0:51:18.880
<v Speaker 3>Wow. Yeah, I guess I never thought about it like that,

0:51:18.960 --> 0:51:21.560
<v Speaker 3>but it is like one of the ads I really

0:51:21.640 --> 0:51:23.400
<v Speaker 3>remember most from childhood.

0:51:23.640 --> 0:51:26.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, because it is legitimately thought provoking. Like let's start

0:51:26.680 --> 0:51:30.279
<v Speaker 2>with the question, you know, how much how many licks

0:51:30.280 --> 0:51:31.880
<v Speaker 2>does it take to get to the center of this

0:51:31.880 --> 0:51:35.600
<v Speaker 2>this tutsi roll pop that implies how much candy does

0:51:35.600 --> 0:51:38.440
<v Speaker 2>a single lick remove from a tutsi pop? How do

0:51:38.480 --> 0:51:42.640
<v Speaker 2>we quantify it, and indeed, when have we actually reached

0:51:42.640 --> 0:51:45.360
<v Speaker 2>the center of the thing, as we'll discuss, This is

0:51:45.400 --> 0:51:48.200
<v Speaker 2>a question that truly ensnares the listener and forces them

0:51:48.200 --> 0:51:53.560
<v Speaker 2>to contemplate the infantiesimal. So, but then there's also the

0:51:53.560 --> 0:51:56.360
<v Speaker 2>way that is it is presented. So the cow, fox,

0:51:56.400 --> 0:51:59.040
<v Speaker 2>and turtle all reply that, hey, we don't know. We

0:51:59.120 --> 0:52:01.880
<v Speaker 2>can't know because we just end up biting through the

0:52:01.960 --> 0:52:04.840
<v Speaker 2>candy too soon. We just bite through it, so we

0:52:05.840 --> 0:52:09.239
<v Speaker 2>can't answer this question. We've never really attempted to have

0:52:09.400 --> 0:52:12.960
<v Speaker 2>the experience you're seeking to quantify. And they say you

0:52:12.960 --> 0:52:16.479
<v Speaker 2>should go ask the wise owl, and so the child does,

0:52:16.600 --> 0:52:19.880
<v Speaker 2>and the wise owl's answer to the question it smacks

0:52:19.880 --> 0:52:22.400
<v Speaker 2>of both the Gordian knot, you know, in which the

0:52:22.400 --> 0:52:25.040
<v Speaker 2>Gordian knot is untied by cutting it into half. And

0:52:25.080 --> 0:52:28.279
<v Speaker 2>then it also it feels vaguely almost like a like

0:52:28.320 --> 0:52:32.320
<v Speaker 2>a Buddhist coon, you know, a phraser riddle that serves

0:52:32.360 --> 0:52:36.520
<v Speaker 2>as a meditation tool, sometimes in the form of a paradox,

0:52:36.680 --> 0:52:40.440
<v Speaker 2>like what is the sound of one hand clapping? And

0:52:40.480 --> 0:52:43.960
<v Speaker 2>so the way the owl says, well, I will answer

0:52:43.960 --> 0:52:48.560
<v Speaker 2>this question for you. Give me the tootsi pop, and

0:52:48.600 --> 0:52:50.840
<v Speaker 2>he do an experiment. He says, let's do an experiment.

0:52:51.040 --> 0:52:53.319
<v Speaker 2>He says, let's find out, and he goes. He licks

0:52:53.320 --> 0:52:55.759
<v Speaker 2>it and says A one, looks at another time, says

0:52:55.800 --> 0:52:58.319
<v Speaker 2>a two, looks at a third time and says A three,

0:52:58.920 --> 0:53:01.560
<v Speaker 2>And then Crunch bites through it and then answers three

0:53:01.719 --> 0:53:07.000
<v Speaker 2>three is the answer, And the child is not amused

0:53:07.040 --> 0:53:09.560
<v Speaker 2>and says, if there's anything I can't stand, it's a

0:53:09.600 --> 0:53:13.839
<v Speaker 2>smart owl. And then the narrator of the commercial asks

0:53:13.880 --> 0:53:16.719
<v Speaker 2>the question once more and says, we may never know.

0:53:17.120 --> 0:53:20.480
<v Speaker 3>So, in addition to being funny, it's actually, at the

0:53:20.560 --> 0:53:24.360
<v Speaker 3>risk of sounding silly, it's actually kind of philosophically interesting

0:53:25.080 --> 0:53:28.879
<v Speaker 3>because I think so it points out that there are

0:53:29.640 --> 0:53:34.800
<v Speaker 3>questions that we can ask that sound like perfectly sensible

0:53:34.920 --> 0:53:40.799
<v Speaker 3>questions that in fact do not contain enough specificity in

0:53:40.880 --> 0:53:42.720
<v Speaker 3>the question to actually be answered.

0:53:43.320 --> 0:53:45.799
<v Speaker 2>I think that's a good read of it. Yeah, yeah,

0:53:46.040 --> 0:53:48.319
<v Speaker 2>I wonder too if they're Like what else we could

0:53:48.360 --> 0:53:51.000
<v Speaker 2>take away from it? Like should we feel ashamed that

0:53:51.120 --> 0:53:54.920
<v Speaker 2>we can't truly savor something like this that long, that

0:53:55.000 --> 0:53:58.200
<v Speaker 2>will eventually grow tired or impatient and simply rush to

0:53:58.239 --> 0:54:01.279
<v Speaker 2>the big finish of a thing. Yeah, that too, or

0:54:01.400 --> 0:54:04.240
<v Speaker 2>are we meant or are we simply you know, refuting

0:54:04.239 --> 0:54:06.560
<v Speaker 2>the logic of the question. You know, maybe TOUTSI pops

0:54:06.760 --> 0:54:09.280
<v Speaker 2>are simply not meant to be licked to the center.

0:54:10.760 --> 0:54:14.400
<v Speaker 2>You know, perhaps you're supposed to crunch through it. Maybe

0:54:14.400 --> 0:54:16.520
<v Speaker 2>some things in life are like that. I don't know,

0:54:17.600 --> 0:54:19.600
<v Speaker 2>but it is also interesting to think about it. This

0:54:19.640 --> 0:54:22.719
<v Speaker 2>is a case where an attempt to measure the perhaps immeasurable,

0:54:23.080 --> 0:54:27.480
<v Speaker 2>is always interrupted by desire. So there's perhaps something telling

0:54:27.520 --> 0:54:32.160
<v Speaker 2>there like desire prevents you from answering the question, and

0:54:32.719 --> 0:54:34.800
<v Speaker 2>maybe what does that say about human nature?

0:54:35.040 --> 0:54:37.760
<v Speaker 3>The idea of getting to the center of a tissy

0:54:37.840 --> 0:54:43.200
<v Speaker 3>pop sounds uncomplicated, but actually it's a very complicated proposition.

0:54:43.560 --> 0:54:47.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, but you know, despite how amusing it is and infectious,

0:54:47.719 --> 0:54:52.440
<v Speaker 2>the idea again legendary commercial. I can scarcely think of

0:54:52.480 --> 0:54:55.640
<v Speaker 2>one that it just sticks in the mind more. But

0:54:55.719 --> 0:54:59.880
<v Speaker 2>still it does ask a question that is subject to experimentation.

0:55:00.800 --> 0:55:04.520
<v Speaker 2>And since this commercial has aired so long and so often,

0:55:05.239 --> 0:55:07.880
<v Speaker 2>you know, it has this huge pop culture footprint across

0:55:07.960 --> 0:55:12.240
<v Speaker 2>multiple generations, so plenty of folks over time have taken

0:55:12.280 --> 0:55:17.200
<v Speaker 2>this question, experimented it with it, and produced varying results

0:55:18.440 --> 0:55:21.640
<v Speaker 2>and this, you know, it varies. I've seen cases where

0:55:21.760 --> 0:55:26.080
<v Speaker 2>it's scientists doing it, you know, probably at least partially

0:55:26.080 --> 0:55:28.600
<v Speaker 2>as a lark. Other cases, this is the sort of

0:55:28.640 --> 0:55:33.640
<v Speaker 2>question that makes for a great student experiment at various levels.

0:55:33.680 --> 0:55:37.120
<v Speaker 2>I've seen like you know, college and graduate students writing

0:55:37.120 --> 0:55:39.120
<v Speaker 2>about this, and I'm sure it has also been explored

0:55:39.160 --> 0:55:42.719
<v Speaker 2>in like science fairs and the like. Definitely, So I'm

0:55:42.760 --> 0:55:44.279
<v Speaker 2>not sure it would be the best use of our

0:55:44.320 --> 0:55:46.359
<v Speaker 2>time to go through all of the results or even

0:55:46.400 --> 0:55:47.960
<v Speaker 2>some of the big ones. I'm going to refer to

0:55:48.000 --> 0:55:50.640
<v Speaker 2>a few here, but I thought maybe we could highlight

0:55:50.760 --> 0:55:55.799
<v Speaker 2>some of the basic issues. So, first of all, this

0:55:56.040 --> 0:56:02.319
<v Speaker 2>is a quandary of tribal corrosion, meaning the synergistic degradation

0:56:02.520 --> 0:56:06.200
<v Speaker 2>of the material surface from the combined action of mechanical

0:56:06.239 --> 0:56:09.360
<v Speaker 2>wear and chemical or electrochemical corrosion.

0:56:09.560 --> 0:56:12.280
<v Speaker 3>All right, so there are at least two different things

0:56:12.360 --> 0:56:16.319
<v Speaker 3>removing the material from the tutsi pop. One is mechanical,

0:56:16.440 --> 0:56:19.640
<v Speaker 3>the scraping with the tongue, and one is chemical, the

0:56:19.680 --> 0:56:22.960
<v Speaker 3>dissolving of the sugar content of the candy by the saliva.

0:56:23.840 --> 0:56:29.680
<v Speaker 2>Right right. In general, tribocorrosion questions impact designs and everything

0:56:29.680 --> 0:56:33.840
<v Speaker 2>from biomedical implants to aerospace. You know, this is this

0:56:33.920 --> 0:56:35.879
<v Speaker 2>is an important area of study when you get into

0:56:35.960 --> 0:56:39.040
<v Speaker 2>the designing things and figuring out what sort of materials

0:56:39.080 --> 0:56:40.680
<v Speaker 2>are going to use and how are you going to

0:56:40.760 --> 0:56:45.560
<v Speaker 2>deal with steady corrosion, be it like brutal, like ongoing corrosion,

0:56:45.600 --> 0:56:47.960
<v Speaker 2>or something that is taking place at almost like a

0:56:48.160 --> 0:56:54.880
<v Speaker 2>licking a tutsi roll level of of things. And more specifically,

0:56:54.920 --> 0:56:59.080
<v Speaker 2>this is a question of bio tribocorrosion, as pointed out

0:56:59.080 --> 0:57:02.080
<v Speaker 2>by row at All in twenty fourteen's Lessons from the

0:57:02.120 --> 0:57:04.960
<v Speaker 2>Lollipop published in Tribology Letters.

0:57:05.280 --> 0:57:08.359
<v Speaker 3>Now, as we alluded to earlier, answering the question how

0:57:08.360 --> 0:57:10.200
<v Speaker 3>many licks does it take to get to the center

0:57:10.719 --> 0:57:14.560
<v Speaker 3>is actually not a straightforward question to answer. You kind

0:57:14.600 --> 0:57:16.439
<v Speaker 3>of have to break this, you'd like, have to add

0:57:16.480 --> 0:57:20.360
<v Speaker 3>some detail or break it down into smaller questions.

0:57:19.840 --> 0:57:23.720
<v Speaker 2>Right, that's right. Yeah, It ultimately involves the quantification of

0:57:23.760 --> 0:57:26.160
<v Speaker 2>a number of factors. So, first of all, we're generally

0:57:26.160 --> 0:57:28.760
<v Speaker 2>trying to figure out how many licks does it take

0:57:28.800 --> 0:57:32.440
<v Speaker 2>to remove a single millimeter of hard candy thickness? Okay,

0:57:32.920 --> 0:57:36.920
<v Speaker 2>how many millimeters of hard candy thickness exist between the

0:57:37.000 --> 0:57:42.160
<v Speaker 2>surface and the tutsi roll center of the pop. Generally,

0:57:42.200 --> 0:57:44.920
<v Speaker 2>I think you're looking to reach just the threshold or

0:57:45.000 --> 0:57:49.439
<v Speaker 2>surface of that chocolate center, and then supposedly we would

0:57:49.440 --> 0:57:51.600
<v Speaker 2>have the answer, right if we knew these two factors.

0:57:51.600 --> 0:57:54.000
<v Speaker 2>It's kind of like, Okay, if I know how fast

0:57:54.000 --> 0:57:56.440
<v Speaker 2>my car is traveling and I know how far I

0:57:56.480 --> 0:57:58.720
<v Speaker 2>need to drive, then I can compare. I can use

0:57:58.760 --> 0:58:01.120
<v Speaker 2>these two facts to figure out how long it takes

0:58:01.160 --> 0:58:02.000
<v Speaker 2>to get there, right.

0:58:02.600 --> 0:58:05.280
<v Speaker 3>You would think so, but what if getting there in

0:58:05.320 --> 0:58:09.640
<v Speaker 3>your car is like a poorly defined area or range.

0:58:10.160 --> 0:58:13.000
<v Speaker 2>That's right, and that this seems to be perhaps the

0:58:13.080 --> 0:58:16.520
<v Speaker 2>biggest factor in the papers I was looking at. So

0:58:16.840 --> 0:58:21.320
<v Speaker 2>despite being a mass produced candy product, you know, in

0:58:21.360 --> 0:58:23.440
<v Speaker 2>which you know, pretty much every Tutsi pop to the

0:58:23.480 --> 0:58:27.160
<v Speaker 2>casual eye looks exactly like the next Toutsi pop, you know,

0:58:27.240 --> 0:58:29.919
<v Speaker 2>unless there's a difference in flavor of the hard candy shell.

0:58:30.760 --> 0:58:32.920
<v Speaker 2>You know, it is almost almost an icon of the

0:58:32.920 --> 0:58:36.840
<v Speaker 2>industrial candy age. And yet not every Tutsi roll pop

0:58:37.000 --> 0:58:40.840
<v Speaker 2>is the same. Specifically, the size and shape of the

0:58:40.880 --> 0:58:44.440
<v Speaker 2>Tutsi rolls center has been found in studies to vary

0:58:44.480 --> 0:58:46.880
<v Speaker 2>from sucker to sucker, and not in not in a

0:58:46.920 --> 0:58:50.280
<v Speaker 2>way that necessarily influences the experiencing of eating the thing.

0:58:50.400 --> 0:58:52.960
<v Speaker 2>So it's not like, you know, this would pass some

0:58:52.960 --> 0:58:57.280
<v Speaker 2>sort of like a QA test for Tutsi rolls pop

0:58:57.400 --> 0:58:59.360
<v Speaker 2>Tutsi roll pops. But when you're getting into this very

0:58:59.400 --> 0:59:02.480
<v Speaker 2>specific quest question, it's going to complicate attempts to generate

0:59:02.480 --> 0:59:03.520
<v Speaker 2>a catch all answer.

0:59:04.160 --> 0:59:06.400
<v Speaker 3>I have no evidence of this, but I just had

0:59:06.440 --> 0:59:09.280
<v Speaker 3>the thought, what if the creation of Tutsi roll pops

0:59:09.400 --> 0:59:12.720
<v Speaker 3>was a way to make use of poorly formed tutsi

0:59:12.840 --> 0:59:15.080
<v Speaker 3>rolls that came off the assembly line with not the

0:59:15.160 --> 0:59:15.840
<v Speaker 3>right shape.

0:59:16.160 --> 0:59:19.960
<v Speaker 2>I mean, I mean such You see such things occurring

0:59:20.040 --> 0:59:24.440
<v Speaker 2>in food products for sure, A tater tot. Yeah yeah,

0:59:24.840 --> 0:59:27.400
<v Speaker 2>but yeah, I suspect it has something to do with

0:59:27.520 --> 0:59:30.959
<v Speaker 2>like the way that the Tutsi pop is produced. Here.

0:59:31.760 --> 0:59:34.320
<v Speaker 2>Another issue that will become important later on is the

0:59:34.320 --> 0:59:38.920
<v Speaker 2>Tutsi pop also features a thick, longitudinal band of hard candy,

0:59:39.440 --> 0:59:43.880
<v Speaker 2>so it's almost like like it's a planet with a

0:59:43.960 --> 0:59:45.960
<v Speaker 2>ring on it, and then it is turned up so

0:59:46.000 --> 0:59:50.120
<v Speaker 2>that the ring is vertical instead of horizontal. If you

0:59:50.120 --> 0:59:52.200
<v Speaker 2>have a Tutsi roll pop in your mouth right now,

0:59:52.240 --> 0:59:53.760
<v Speaker 2>remove it. Take a look at it, you'll see what

0:59:53.800 --> 0:59:57.800
<v Speaker 2>I'm talking about, unless you have sucked the pop down

0:59:57.920 --> 1:00:01.240
<v Speaker 2>enough to wear that particular band and is no longer present.

1:00:01.600 --> 1:00:06.040
<v Speaker 3>It's also like a really pronounced version of the ring

1:00:06.240 --> 1:00:08.960
<v Speaker 3>ridge running around Saturn's moon yapotus.

1:00:09.320 --> 1:00:12.280
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, that sort of thing. Okay. Another factor is

1:00:12.320 --> 1:00:15.080
<v Speaker 2>the positioning of the candy center tends to be a

1:00:15.080 --> 1:00:19.160
<v Speaker 2>bit off, so it very much depends. So in other words,

1:00:20.040 --> 1:00:23.680
<v Speaker 2>it's not like we might think of this as like

1:00:23.720 --> 1:00:25.720
<v Speaker 2>a cross section of a planet where you're going to

1:00:25.800 --> 1:00:27.680
<v Speaker 2>have like the various layers and then you're going to

1:00:27.720 --> 1:00:29.040
<v Speaker 2>get down to the core, and the core is going

1:00:29.080 --> 1:00:33.600
<v Speaker 2>to essentially be, you know, a spherical object in the

1:00:33.640 --> 1:00:37.160
<v Speaker 2>center of the pop. But this doesn't seem to be

1:00:37.200 --> 1:00:40.520
<v Speaker 2>the case. It can be rather lopsided, if you see.

1:00:40.760 --> 1:00:42.520
<v Speaker 2>You can see in some of these papers where they've

1:00:42.560 --> 1:00:47.400
<v Speaker 2>sawed through the candy to show like where the tutsi

1:00:47.480 --> 1:00:50.840
<v Speaker 2>roll center lies. It's not always at the center. Sometimes

1:00:50.840 --> 1:00:53.720
<v Speaker 2>it's pushed up more towards the top, and it definitely

1:00:53.720 --> 1:00:55.959
<v Speaker 2>can be pushed more to one side or the other,

1:00:56.320 --> 1:00:58.960
<v Speaker 2>so the candy center can be closer to the surface

1:00:59.000 --> 1:01:01.800
<v Speaker 2>on one side of the side or versus another, meaning

1:01:01.880 --> 1:01:05.480
<v Speaker 2>that one side will often offer at least a slightly

1:01:05.600 --> 1:01:09.280
<v Speaker 2>shorter licking pathway to the center to the surface of

1:01:09.320 --> 1:01:13.560
<v Speaker 2>the tutsi roll center devilish. So again, lots of recorded

1:01:13.600 --> 1:01:15.720
<v Speaker 2>experiments on this quandary, both as a kind of fun

1:01:15.800 --> 1:01:18.640
<v Speaker 2>lark by professionals as well as by students, and in fact,

1:01:19.440 --> 1:01:21.920
<v Speaker 2>some of the student papers are really good. There's actually

1:01:21.960 --> 1:01:25.120
<v Speaker 2>a really good twenty fifteen student paper from the University

1:01:25.160 --> 1:01:30.960
<v Speaker 2>of Wisconsin is titled World May Never Know, Unwrapping the

1:01:31.000 --> 1:01:34.240
<v Speaker 2>Mystery of the Tutsi Pop by Tyler T. Schmidt. It's

1:01:34.240 --> 1:01:39.439
<v Speaker 2>published in the University of Wisconsin's Minds Journal, and the

1:01:39.480 --> 1:01:42.280
<v Speaker 2>individual who wrote this also conducted his own research. That's

1:01:42.280 --> 1:01:45.600
<v Speaker 2>the great thing about this is that generally the research

1:01:45.680 --> 1:01:49.040
<v Speaker 2>is very easily obtainable. All you need are tutsi pops

1:01:49.680 --> 1:01:52.080
<v Speaker 2>and some tongues. You could just do it with the

1:01:52.080 --> 1:01:54.160
<v Speaker 2>one tongue you have in your mouth, or like some

1:01:54.200 --> 1:02:00.200
<v Speaker 2>of these studies, they talk about acquiring human liquors some

1:02:00.280 --> 1:02:03.440
<v Speaker 2>test subjects in on the action. So Schmidt in that

1:02:03.480 --> 1:02:06.320
<v Speaker 2>paper did refer back to some other studies. I'm just

1:02:06.320 --> 1:02:08.160
<v Speaker 2>going to throw out some numbers here because it will

1:02:08.200 --> 1:02:09.920
<v Speaker 2>give you an idea of some of the range we're

1:02:09.960 --> 1:02:14.000
<v Speaker 2>dealing with, because we get again some wildly different estimates

1:02:14.400 --> 1:02:18.840
<v Speaker 2>on how many licks it takes. He cites a paper

1:02:18.840 --> 1:02:22.360
<v Speaker 2>by Zerra from nineteen ninety six involved twenty two trials.

1:02:22.440 --> 1:02:24.520
<v Speaker 2>Average number of licks to get to that center. One

1:02:24.560 --> 1:02:27.959
<v Speaker 2>hundred and forty two sounds low to me. Then there's

1:02:28.000 --> 1:02:30.920
<v Speaker 2>a Wakespan paper from twentousand and nine, twenty two trials

1:02:30.920 --> 1:02:35.160
<v Speaker 2>as well, two hundred and fifty four licks to reveal

1:02:35.320 --> 1:02:37.240
<v Speaker 2>one side of that TUTSI roll center.

1:02:37.440 --> 1:02:38.880
<v Speaker 3>Huh, that's a big range.

1:02:39.080 --> 1:02:41.320
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, And I think that study also looked like, okay,

1:02:41.320 --> 1:02:44.640
<v Speaker 2>how many licks total, like they wanted to expose both sides.

1:02:44.680 --> 1:02:46.360
<v Speaker 2>I don't know. Again, you have to really nail these

1:02:46.360 --> 1:02:50.439
<v Speaker 2>things down before you attempt to answer. And then there's

1:02:50.480 --> 1:02:54.360
<v Speaker 2>a there's a really good overview that was provided by

1:02:54.520 --> 1:02:59.280
<v Speaker 2>Corey Hyde in twenty thirteen for the Royal Statistical Society's

1:02:59.360 --> 1:03:03.320
<v Speaker 2>Journals Sgnificance. The title of this was Tutsi pops colon

1:03:03.480 --> 1:03:05.280
<v Speaker 2>how many licks to the chocolate.

1:03:05.560 --> 1:03:07.920
<v Speaker 3>To the chocolate? Something sounds kind of terse about that.

1:03:09.760 --> 1:03:12.280
<v Speaker 2>I mean, I think you're being generous calling it chocolate,

1:03:12.400 --> 1:03:18.120
<v Speaker 2>but anyway get the So this author points out that

1:03:19.560 --> 1:03:23.680
<v Speaker 2>three different US universities at least have not only used

1:03:23.880 --> 1:03:26.840
<v Speaker 2>human licking trials to try and answer the question, but

1:03:26.880 --> 1:03:29.520
<v Speaker 2>they have also constructed licking machines.

1:03:30.160 --> 1:03:32.920
<v Speaker 3>God bless them wonderful licking machines.

1:03:33.240 --> 1:03:36.400
<v Speaker 2>Now a note on licking machines. We're talking about custom

1:03:36.440 --> 1:03:40.080
<v Speaker 2>made machines in these situations that would utilize some manner

1:03:40.120 --> 1:03:43.320
<v Speaker 2>of soft artificial tongue or some sort of tongue like

1:03:45.440 --> 1:03:49.200
<v Speaker 2>you know, implement that would be mechanically used to apply

1:03:49.320 --> 1:03:51.720
<v Speaker 2>lick after lick to the sucker. Not to be confused

1:03:51.720 --> 1:03:54.200
<v Speaker 2>with the various licking machines that will pop up if you,

1:03:54.400 --> 1:03:56.640
<v Speaker 2>like me, do a search on your work computer for

1:03:56.720 --> 1:04:00.720
<v Speaker 2>that turn. So there are other devices. I don't know.

1:04:00.720 --> 1:04:02.560
<v Speaker 2>Maybe in the future someone will take some of these

1:04:02.560 --> 1:04:05.280
<v Speaker 2>devices and use them to try and solve the TUTSI

1:04:05.360 --> 1:04:07.000
<v Speaker 2>roll pop enigma.

1:04:07.720 --> 1:04:11.400
<v Speaker 3>But licking machines designed for personal use are not what

1:04:11.440 --> 1:04:12.760
<v Speaker 3>we're used in these studies.

1:04:12.840 --> 1:04:18.080
<v Speaker 2>These are I believe created for the experiments. But even

1:04:18.120 --> 1:04:22.520
<v Speaker 2>then there seems to be just some wild variety in

1:04:23.000 --> 1:04:26.120
<v Speaker 2>the results we get. So according to hyde, licking machine

1:04:26.320 --> 1:04:30.760
<v Speaker 2>results for each of these three universities. Purdue University took

1:04:30.760 --> 1:04:34.280
<v Speaker 2>three hundred and sixty four mechanical licks, University of Michigan

1:04:34.320 --> 1:04:39.000
<v Speaker 2>four hundred and eleven mechanical licks, Harvard University's licking machine

1:04:39.240 --> 1:04:41.160
<v Speaker 2>two hundred and fifty five licks.

1:04:41.440 --> 1:04:43.760
<v Speaker 3>That sounds like that's got to be a difference in

1:04:44.040 --> 1:04:46.640
<v Speaker 3>method or malfunction or something.

1:04:46.840 --> 1:04:49.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, because that's that's pretty far away from like the

1:04:49.720 --> 1:04:54.280
<v Speaker 2>various human licking trials, which, by the way, it also

1:04:54.360 --> 1:05:00.000
<v Speaker 2>points to three different university studies that used human licking trials. Again,

1:05:00.120 --> 1:05:04.320
<v Speaker 2>Purdue University was involved two hundred and fifty two licks,

1:05:04.880 --> 1:05:07.600
<v Speaker 2>Swarthmore College one hundred and forty four licks, and then

1:05:07.800 --> 1:05:11.240
<v Speaker 2>the University of Cambridge four hundred and eighty one licks.

1:05:11.320 --> 1:05:16.080
<v Speaker 2>What I don't know. Again, I didn't get into all

1:05:16.120 --> 1:05:19.480
<v Speaker 2>the details of how they conducted their experiment versus others,

1:05:19.560 --> 1:05:22.600
<v Speaker 2>But I mean, it just goes to show that depending

1:05:22.680 --> 1:05:24.680
<v Speaker 2>on how you roll out the question and how you

1:05:24.720 --> 1:05:29.200
<v Speaker 2>attempt to answer it, you could get some crazy different numbers. Yeah.

1:05:29.560 --> 1:05:31.400
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, this sounds like this's got to be a different

1:05:31.440 --> 1:05:33.120
<v Speaker 3>threshold they're going for or something.

1:05:33.280 --> 1:05:36.280
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, And this probably goes without saying, but I want

1:05:36.280 --> 1:05:38.600
<v Speaker 2>to drive home that none of these experiments human or

1:05:38.640 --> 1:05:42.880
<v Speaker 2>a machine involved the chomp of desire, because you could

1:05:42.880 --> 1:05:45.400
<v Speaker 2>easily question that. You could say, well, after one hundred

1:05:45.400 --> 1:05:47.280
<v Speaker 2>and forty four licks, they just gave up and bit it.

1:05:47.320 --> 1:05:50.160
<v Speaker 2>They're just like the owl. The commercial was absolutely correct.

1:05:50.560 --> 1:05:53.720
<v Speaker 2>Three four hundred and eighty one is what you get

1:05:53.800 --> 1:05:58.880
<v Speaker 2>if desire is somehow absolutely prohibited. But no, no, these

1:05:58.920 --> 1:06:00.640
<v Speaker 2>are all just pure licks, no chumps.

1:06:00.840 --> 1:06:03.200
<v Speaker 3>Now, I want to ask a question that challenges the

1:06:03.320 --> 1:06:06.080
<v Speaker 3>very premise of this investigation and goes back to what

1:06:06.120 --> 1:06:09.919
<v Speaker 3>the wise philosopher Owl may have been implying. What if

1:06:10.040 --> 1:06:14.640
<v Speaker 3>you don't actually get to the center by licking, You

1:06:14.680 --> 1:06:19.160
<v Speaker 3>can only get to the center by chomping, because the

1:06:19.200 --> 1:06:22.720
<v Speaker 3>achievement of the center is the satisfying chomp through the

1:06:22.800 --> 1:06:24.360
<v Speaker 3>last bits of hard candy.

1:06:25.320 --> 1:06:26.960
<v Speaker 2>You know, I would, I mean, I think there's a

1:06:27.000 --> 1:06:31.360
<v Speaker 2>strong argument for that. I read this may be apocryphal,

1:06:31.480 --> 1:06:33.680
<v Speaker 2>because you know, you encounter this sort of thing certainly

1:06:33.680 --> 1:06:36.080
<v Speaker 2>in the creation of candies and an invention in general.

1:06:36.120 --> 1:06:41.720
<v Speaker 2>But I think the idea was that the I may

1:06:41.720 --> 1:06:43.440
<v Speaker 2>have this backwards, but I think the inventor of the

1:06:43.440 --> 1:06:46.720
<v Speaker 2>tutsi role pop the guy who proposed this idea. He

1:06:46.880 --> 1:06:49.280
<v Speaker 2>was eating a tutsi roll and at the same time

1:06:49.360 --> 1:06:52.000
<v Speaker 2>he took a lick of his kids sucker, and he

1:06:52.080 --> 1:06:55.080
<v Speaker 2>was like, these two go great together. So if that

1:06:55.280 --> 1:06:58.360
<v Speaker 2>is indeed true, and that is the genesis of the idea,

1:06:59.120 --> 1:07:02.440
<v Speaker 2>then you perhaps have to ask yourself which experience gives

1:07:02.480 --> 1:07:06.400
<v Speaker 2>you that taste combination the best, because if it were

1:07:06.440 --> 1:07:09.480
<v Speaker 2>a piece of sushi, right, you don't lick to get

1:07:09.520 --> 1:07:12.600
<v Speaker 2>the center of a sushi role the ideas you want

1:07:12.600 --> 1:07:14.760
<v Speaker 2>to encount. You want to have it all at once.

1:07:15.320 --> 1:07:17.000
<v Speaker 2>I mean, not that there's I guess the wrong way

1:07:17.040 --> 1:07:20.600
<v Speaker 2>to eat it. I guess it's valid as well, But yeah,

1:07:20.640 --> 1:07:22.919
<v Speaker 2>you could you could easily ask, well, which which version

1:07:22.960 --> 1:07:25.160
<v Speaker 2>gets you the combination of, say, the orange hard candy

1:07:25.160 --> 1:07:26.480
<v Speaker 2>and the tutsi roll at the same time.

1:07:26.800 --> 1:07:37.640
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, yeah, Now.

1:07:37.800 --> 1:07:41.000
<v Speaker 2>Hide also pointed out that via their own slicing of

1:07:41.360 --> 1:07:44.000
<v Speaker 2>tutsi pops in half, they became concerned that the center

1:07:44.520 --> 1:07:48.760
<v Speaker 2>is more coin shaped than it is spherical, and thought

1:07:48.760 --> 1:07:52.439
<v Speaker 2>that having human liquors go at the thicker banded part

1:07:52.480 --> 1:07:55.680
<v Speaker 2>of the sucker was actually the way to go. You know,

1:07:55.720 --> 1:07:58.160
<v Speaker 2>this would mean you it would inevitably mean more licks

1:07:58.480 --> 1:07:59.840
<v Speaker 2>to get to the center because you're going at the

1:07:59.840 --> 1:08:04.400
<v Speaker 2>thick is part. But they thought that this would enable

1:08:04.560 --> 1:08:08.520
<v Speaker 2>the liquors to quote find the center with much smaller variability.

1:08:09.360 --> 1:08:13.480
<v Speaker 2>And their answer via experimentation like this was four hundred

1:08:13.520 --> 1:08:17.920
<v Speaker 2>and seventeen licks, give or take thirty nine licks. So

1:08:18.160 --> 1:08:21.240
<v Speaker 2>I don't know's I guess the idea is again, it

1:08:21.240 --> 1:08:23.920
<v Speaker 2>would just be more uniform and you would have a

1:08:23.960 --> 1:08:28.040
<v Speaker 2>definite place to start. Hyde also looked at variables in

1:08:28.080 --> 1:08:33.280
<v Speaker 2>human saliva and in individual tongue details, and these included

1:08:33.400 --> 1:08:38.920
<v Speaker 2>lick force, mouth temperature, pH, level of saliva, and solubility level.

1:08:39.360 --> 1:08:42.040
<v Speaker 2>Only the latter seemed to have an observable impact, and

1:08:42.080 --> 1:08:45.120
<v Speaker 2>even it had little to no effect on average licks.

1:08:45.439 --> 1:08:48.880
<v Speaker 2>So everything the author here contends really has to do

1:08:48.920 --> 1:08:51.719
<v Speaker 2>with the positioning of the candy center inside the sucker.

1:08:52.000 --> 1:08:55.760
<v Speaker 2>The other factors did not apparently have that much of

1:08:55.800 --> 1:08:58.160
<v Speaker 2>an impact, like person to person, liquor to.

1:08:58.160 --> 1:09:00.280
<v Speaker 3>Liquor, or they might kind of even out on a.

1:09:00.479 --> 1:09:02.719
<v Speaker 2>Yah are certainly even out when you're dealing with enough

1:09:02.800 --> 1:09:07.000
<v Speaker 2>tongues licking enough lollipops, which is of course you know

1:09:07.040 --> 1:09:09.519
<v Speaker 2>with any scientific experiment, like that's what you're looking for,

1:09:09.720 --> 1:09:12.559
<v Speaker 2>like not what is not what the exceptional liquor does,

1:09:12.600 --> 1:09:16.400
<v Speaker 2>but what does the average liquor accomplish, you know, over

1:09:16.520 --> 1:09:19.400
<v Speaker 2>multiple test subjects. So I think there's a strong case

1:09:19.439 --> 1:09:22.080
<v Speaker 2>to be made here that that you really have to

1:09:22.120 --> 1:09:25.559
<v Speaker 2>have a standardized lick location for these experiments, and you

1:09:25.640 --> 1:09:28.839
<v Speaker 2>have to take into account the variability in the candy

1:09:28.920 --> 1:09:32.280
<v Speaker 2>core and like that that's key. If you dismiss the

1:09:32.320 --> 1:09:35.960
<v Speaker 2>idea that each TOTSI pop is a little bit different

1:09:36.160 --> 1:09:39.200
<v Speaker 2>compared to the next, than you're kind of doomed from

1:09:39.240 --> 1:09:39.679
<v Speaker 2>the start.

1:09:40.160 --> 1:09:44.000
<v Speaker 3>Can I bring up one possible way this research is interesting.

1:09:44.680 --> 1:09:46.600
<v Speaker 3>I guess we've sort of already touched on this, but

1:09:46.680 --> 1:09:49.959
<v Speaker 3>to make it more explicit, this research might be interesting

1:09:50.080 --> 1:09:55.000
<v Speaker 3>in the way it illuminates the gaps between a mechanistic

1:09:55.720 --> 1:10:01.640
<v Speaker 3>or quantitative understanding of a behavioral phenomenon and the enjoyment

1:10:01.800 --> 1:10:05.439
<v Speaker 3>or experience we get out of that phenomenon. This comes

1:10:05.479 --> 1:10:08.760
<v Speaker 3>back to, you know, the wisdom of the owl. Is

1:10:08.800 --> 1:10:12.240
<v Speaker 3>it really getting to the center if you lick your

1:10:12.240 --> 1:10:14.000
<v Speaker 3>way all the way to the center and you deny

1:10:14.080 --> 1:10:16.960
<v Speaker 3>yourself the bite, which at least the owl obviously likes.

1:10:17.040 --> 1:10:19.240
<v Speaker 3>The owl likes biting through part of the candy to

1:10:19.280 --> 1:10:21.880
<v Speaker 3>get to the center that is defining the experience for

1:10:21.960 --> 1:10:25.280
<v Speaker 3>the owl. And thus, by even if you come up

1:10:25.320 --> 1:10:28.640
<v Speaker 3>with a really good method to investigate this and you

1:10:28.720 --> 1:10:30.720
<v Speaker 3>find out, you know, okay, this is a reliable way

1:10:30.760 --> 1:10:32.920
<v Speaker 3>of knowing how many licks it takes to get to

1:10:32.960 --> 1:10:36.839
<v Speaker 3>the center, just by licking, you have misunderstood the question

1:10:37.240 --> 1:10:40.839
<v Speaker 3>of the Tutsi pop's existence and you have not really

1:10:40.920 --> 1:10:45.720
<v Speaker 3>found what makes the Tutsi pop valuable to people. And

1:10:45.800 --> 1:10:48.280
<v Speaker 3>this is a common thing actually, and not just in

1:10:48.640 --> 1:10:51.960
<v Speaker 3>you know, funny little experiments like this, but in very

1:10:52.040 --> 1:10:56.439
<v Speaker 3>real experiments, especially in the social sciences, like we can find.

1:10:56.479 --> 1:11:00.759
<v Speaker 3>And this is not at all to criticize quantitytive ways

1:11:00.800 --> 1:11:03.240
<v Speaker 3>of exploring the world, but it's to remember there's a

1:11:03.280 --> 1:11:08.880
<v Speaker 3>difference between quantitatively studying a phenomenon that affects human life

1:11:09.240 --> 1:11:13.120
<v Speaker 3>and understanding the value of that phenomenon to human life.

1:11:13.160 --> 1:11:14.040
<v Speaker 3>If that makes sense.

1:11:14.760 --> 1:11:17.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, because you know, once you get to the

1:11:17.080 --> 1:11:20.639
<v Speaker 2>center of the Tutsi pop, it's also over. So yeah,

1:11:20.760 --> 1:11:23.439
<v Speaker 2>you know, the experience is done with and then I guess,

1:11:23.520 --> 1:11:26.320
<v Speaker 2>especially if you're a kid on Halloween in like the

1:11:26.400 --> 1:11:28.519
<v Speaker 2>nineteen eighties or nineteen nineties, you just move on to

1:11:28.600 --> 1:11:31.000
<v Speaker 2>the next Tutsi pop. You've probably got six of them

1:11:31.000 --> 1:11:32.760
<v Speaker 2>in there, and yes, you are going to eat all

1:11:32.840 --> 1:11:35.800
<v Speaker 2>of them in one Halloween night. But I'd love to

1:11:35.800 --> 1:11:38.519
<v Speaker 2>hear from folks out there. What was your approach to

1:11:38.640 --> 1:11:41.759
<v Speaker 2>eating a Tutsi roll pop? What is it like today?

1:11:42.040 --> 1:11:44.040
<v Speaker 2>Did you chomp through it? Did you actually lick through

1:11:44.040 --> 1:11:47.599
<v Speaker 2>the whole thing? Yeah? Feel free to share your thoughts

1:11:47.680 --> 1:11:55.840
<v Speaker 2>on the philosophy and the experimental science of this whole scenario. Likewise,

1:11:56.520 --> 1:12:01.559
<v Speaker 2>magical licking and spitting too, for that matter, examples from

1:12:01.760 --> 1:12:04.840
<v Speaker 2>Magic Systems, real and imagined. If you've got something you

1:12:04.840 --> 1:12:07.960
<v Speaker 2>would like to share with us on these, definitely ride

1:12:08.000 --> 1:12:11.679
<v Speaker 2>in and chat with us. Absolutely again. We'll be back

1:12:12.280 --> 1:12:14.080
<v Speaker 2>in our next core episode of Stuff to Blow Your

1:12:14.120 --> 1:12:17.120
<v Speaker 2>Mind to continue our exploration of licking. We'll definitely get

1:12:17.120 --> 1:12:20.760
<v Speaker 2>into more animal world licking. We will probably talk about

1:12:20.840 --> 1:12:23.760
<v Speaker 2>cats and dogs and who knows what else. Just a

1:12:23.760 --> 1:12:25.720
<v Speaker 2>reminder to everyone out there that Stuff to Blow Your

1:12:25.720 --> 1:12:28.040
<v Speaker 2>Mind is primarily a science and culture podcast, with core

1:12:28.080 --> 1:12:30.960
<v Speaker 2>episodes on Tuesdays and Thursdays, short form episodes on Wednesdays

1:12:30.960 --> 1:12:33.200
<v Speaker 2>and on Fridays. We set aside most serious concerns to

1:12:33.200 --> 1:12:36.120
<v Speaker 2>just talk about a weird movie on Weird House Cinema.

1:12:36.320 --> 1:12:39.959
<v Speaker 3>Huge thanks as always to our excellent audio producer JJ Posway.

1:12:40.200 --> 1:12:41.599
<v Speaker 3>If you would like to get in touch with us

1:12:41.600 --> 1:12:43.920
<v Speaker 3>with feedback on this episode or any other, to suggest

1:12:44.000 --> 1:12:45.880
<v Speaker 3>a topic for the future, or just to say hello,

1:12:46.080 --> 1:12:48.559
<v Speaker 3>you can email us at contact at stuff to Blow

1:12:48.600 --> 1:12:56.400
<v Speaker 3>your Mind dot com.

1:12:56.760 --> 1:12:59.680
<v Speaker 1>Stuff to Blow Your Mind is production of iHeartRadio. For

1:12:59.720 --> 1:13:03.600
<v Speaker 1>more podcast My Heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,

1:13:03.680 --> 1:13:24.479
<v Speaker 1>or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. M