WEBVTT - The Alphabet and the Goddess, Part 2

0:00:03.040 --> 0:00:05.840
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind from how Stuff

0:00:05.840 --> 0:00:14.239
<v Speaker 1>Works dot com. Hey you welcome to Stuff to Blow

0:00:14.280 --> 0:00:17.120
<v Speaker 1>your Mind. My name is Robert Lamb and I'm Joe McCormick.

0:00:17.160 --> 0:00:18.840
<v Speaker 1>And this is going to be part two of our

0:00:18.880 --> 0:00:23.560
<v Speaker 1>two part discussion about Leonard slain book The Alphabet Versus

0:00:23.640 --> 0:00:29.240
<v Speaker 1>the Goddess, which argues that literacy and writing, especially alphabetic writing,

0:00:29.680 --> 0:00:33.080
<v Speaker 1>led to a demotion of the status of women and

0:00:33.159 --> 0:00:38.560
<v Speaker 1>goddesses and a promotion or arise in patriarchal religions and cultures.

0:00:38.880 --> 0:00:41.000
<v Speaker 1>So if you haven't listened to that first episode, you

0:00:41.159 --> 0:00:43.720
<v Speaker 1>go back check that one out, so this one makes sense.

0:00:44.200 --> 0:00:47.360
<v Speaker 1>But for a basic refresher, last time we discussed goddesses,

0:00:47.400 --> 0:00:50.479
<v Speaker 1>we talked about Anano, we talked about Thetis, and we

0:00:50.560 --> 0:00:55.080
<v Speaker 1>outlined the basics of Leonard Slain's hypothesis. His main claim

0:00:55.360 --> 0:00:58.640
<v Speaker 1>is that human evolution led to a gender division and

0:00:58.720 --> 0:01:02.160
<v Speaker 1>brain hemisphere. Favorite is um that men and women biologically

0:01:02.240 --> 0:01:04.480
<v Speaker 1>with their brains, can do pretty much the same things

0:01:04.520 --> 0:01:07.199
<v Speaker 1>if they want to, but that the division of labor

0:01:07.240 --> 0:01:10.880
<v Speaker 1>and hunter gatherer culture tended to favor a brain lateralized

0:01:10.920 --> 0:01:13.440
<v Speaker 1>division of labor, where men were usually more left brain

0:01:13.480 --> 0:01:16.480
<v Speaker 1>oriented because men had to be the hunters, and that

0:01:16.480 --> 0:01:20.280
<v Speaker 1>that hunting required left brain emphasies on things like sequential

0:01:20.480 --> 0:01:24.840
<v Speaker 1>detail based thinking, uh, and emotional coldness and cruelty. And

0:01:24.880 --> 0:01:27.119
<v Speaker 1>then on the other hand, you had women more often

0:01:27.160 --> 0:01:30.800
<v Speaker 1>being selected for labor that favor favored right brain type

0:01:30.800 --> 0:01:37.760
<v Speaker 1>stuff like emotional intuitions, empathy, nurturing, education, speech as opposed

0:01:37.800 --> 0:01:41.840
<v Speaker 1>to written language and images. And so Schlain thinks, what

0:01:42.080 --> 0:01:45.520
<v Speaker 1>that the introduction of writing kind of messed things up.

0:01:45.560 --> 0:01:49.680
<v Speaker 1>It shifted human culture to favor the left brain perceptual

0:01:49.760 --> 0:01:54.000
<v Speaker 1>modes which traditionally had been associated with men males of

0:01:54.040 --> 0:01:57.240
<v Speaker 1>the species, and that that gave rise to patriarchy and

0:01:57.280 --> 0:02:01.400
<v Speaker 1>patriarchal culture. Yeah, it's such a puloss hypothesis. I'd really

0:02:01.520 --> 0:02:03.120
<v Speaker 1>I haven't been able to get it out of my

0:02:03.160 --> 0:02:05.960
<v Speaker 1>mind since we first started researching it. Yeah, it's one

0:02:06.000 --> 0:02:08.079
<v Speaker 1>of those that, as we said last time, even if

0:02:08.120 --> 0:02:11.320
<v Speaker 1>we don't necessarily think his argument is convincing, or if

0:02:11.520 --> 0:02:14.480
<v Speaker 1>you know, he hasn't necessarily made his case that this

0:02:14.560 --> 0:02:17.280
<v Speaker 1>is really how it happened, it certainly brings up a

0:02:17.320 --> 0:02:20.079
<v Speaker 1>lot of interesting subjects along the way, and so he

0:02:20.440 --> 0:02:23.680
<v Speaker 1>raises interesting questions. Even if he's not ultimately right, and

0:02:23.720 --> 0:02:26.800
<v Speaker 1>I'm I'm pretty sure I'm not convinced by his argument

0:02:26.800 --> 0:02:30.040
<v Speaker 1>in the end, But it's a fascinating book. Nonetheless. Yeah,

0:02:30.080 --> 0:02:33.240
<v Speaker 1>like I said, it forces you to to rethink what language,

0:02:33.240 --> 0:02:36.560
<v Speaker 1>what written language, does to us, and and why the

0:02:36.600 --> 0:02:39.560
<v Speaker 1>status of the goddess is so diminished in our world,

0:02:39.680 --> 0:02:41.760
<v Speaker 1>to the point where I was telling my son, who's

0:02:41.800 --> 0:02:44.079
<v Speaker 1>only he's only six, just barely six, I was telling

0:02:44.160 --> 0:02:47.040
<v Speaker 1>him about goddesses, and then later that day we see

0:02:47.040 --> 0:02:49.400
<v Speaker 1>a representation of a goddess and he refers to it

0:02:49.440 --> 0:02:53.240
<v Speaker 1>as a lady god. I'm like, no, actually, it's it's

0:02:53.240 --> 0:02:55.760
<v Speaker 1>a goddess. It is. Uh, it's not just a lady

0:02:55.880 --> 0:02:58.280
<v Speaker 1>version of this other thing it is. It's really kind

0:02:58.280 --> 0:03:00.920
<v Speaker 1>of the primordial thing you should be swing it a

0:03:01.000 --> 0:03:04.799
<v Speaker 1>man goddess. Yeah, exactly. That That makes me think, like

0:03:04.880 --> 0:03:07.040
<v Speaker 1>it's so deeply embedded. Now, I'm not calling your son

0:03:07.040 --> 0:03:10.040
<v Speaker 1>a sexist, but I'm saying, like, you know, how what

0:03:10.120 --> 0:03:12.919
<v Speaker 1>how come we see a goddess and we think that's

0:03:12.919 --> 0:03:15.400
<v Speaker 1>a lady god instead of seeing a male god and

0:03:15.480 --> 0:03:19.200
<v Speaker 1>think that's a male goddess. Yeah, I mean, it's he's

0:03:19.240 --> 0:03:22.160
<v Speaker 1>not sexist, but he he is growing up in a

0:03:22.200 --> 0:03:26.400
<v Speaker 1>world that is that is ruled by by by patriarchy,

0:03:26.520 --> 0:03:29.720
<v Speaker 1>and you can, you can try and balance out of

0:03:29.800 --> 0:03:33.480
<v Speaker 1>child's upbringing as much as possible, but they're still growing

0:03:33.560 --> 0:03:36.320
<v Speaker 1>up exposed to that larger world. Yeah, and growing up

0:03:36.320 --> 0:03:38.840
<v Speaker 1>with the legacy of you know, hundreds or thousands of

0:03:38.880 --> 0:03:42.160
<v Speaker 1>years of literature and archetypes, and you know, it's it's

0:03:42.200 --> 0:03:44.840
<v Speaker 1>they're not just in the full works of literature, but

0:03:44.880 --> 0:03:47.400
<v Speaker 1>it's there in the metaphors we use in everyday speech.

0:03:47.520 --> 0:03:50.280
<v Speaker 1>They tend to have a kind of patriarchal slant to them,

0:03:50.360 --> 0:03:53.280
<v Speaker 1>or at least one that associates valued cultural traits or

0:03:53.400 --> 0:03:57.640
<v Speaker 1>valued activities with men and men's behavior, and that goes

0:03:57.680 --> 0:04:01.240
<v Speaker 1>back through history. Uh, maybe only the fifty pages or

0:04:01.240 --> 0:04:04.320
<v Speaker 1>so of Schlane's book are actually the part where he's

0:04:04.360 --> 0:04:09.440
<v Speaker 1>outlining his hypothesis about evolution and brain lateralization um and

0:04:09.440 --> 0:04:11.520
<v Speaker 1>and how writing affects that, And then most of the

0:04:11.560 --> 0:04:14.960
<v Speaker 1>rest of the book is just him exploring cultures and

0:04:15.040 --> 0:04:19.920
<v Speaker 1>time periods throughout history when the status of writing changed

0:04:20.120 --> 0:04:23.080
<v Speaker 1>or when writing was introduced, and what happens to the

0:04:23.120 --> 0:04:25.719
<v Speaker 1>cultures there. Like one of the examples he talks about

0:04:26.200 --> 0:04:29.880
<v Speaker 1>is in ancient Mesopotamia, with the introduction of cune of

0:04:29.960 --> 0:04:33.799
<v Speaker 1>form and professionalized scribes and things like that, when writing

0:04:33.880 --> 0:04:37.320
<v Speaker 1>was professionalized, you know. He thinks that this leads to

0:04:38.080 --> 0:04:41.599
<v Speaker 1>the introduction of the idea of written law codes instead

0:04:41.640 --> 0:04:45.280
<v Speaker 1>of unwritten norms of behavior, govering what's acceptable and what's

0:04:45.279 --> 0:04:48.440
<v Speaker 1>not acceptable to do in society. And so Slaine looks

0:04:48.560 --> 0:04:52.239
<v Speaker 1>at some of the misogynistic qualities of the earliest written

0:04:52.600 --> 0:04:55.320
<v Speaker 1>law codes and says, hmmm, it looks it looks to

0:04:55.400 --> 0:04:59.400
<v Speaker 1>him like maybe the introduction of writing itself somehow coincided

0:04:59.720 --> 0:05:04.840
<v Speaker 1>with a sharp turn towards misogynistic standards of conduct in society. Now.

0:05:04.880 --> 0:05:06.320
<v Speaker 1>Of course, sh Lane spends a lot of time with

0:05:06.360 --> 0:05:08.719
<v Speaker 1>the Greeks because there's a lot of mythological and historical

0:05:08.760 --> 0:05:12.520
<v Speaker 1>content to discuss there. And he points to the comparison

0:05:12.560 --> 0:05:15.760
<v Speaker 1>to be made between Athens and Sparta as an example

0:05:15.839 --> 0:05:18.920
<v Speaker 1>of how the spread of the written word pushed uh

0:05:19.680 --> 0:05:23.200
<v Speaker 1>the goddess and just female power to the periphery of

0:05:23.240 --> 0:05:26.240
<v Speaker 1>Greek culture, and he says that they're it's they're perfect

0:05:26.320 --> 0:05:29.440
<v Speaker 1>examples to compare because they both spoke the same language,

0:05:29.720 --> 0:05:33.039
<v Speaker 1>they worship the same gods, they spoken and wrote the

0:05:33.120 --> 0:05:36.560
<v Speaker 1>same language, but the two big differences, he says, emerge

0:05:36.600 --> 0:05:40.600
<v Speaker 1>in their treatment of women and their attitudes towards the alphabet.

0:05:40.800 --> 0:05:44.320
<v Speaker 1>That's interesting. Yeah, so let's talk about Sparta. I will

0:05:44.400 --> 0:05:48.160
<v Speaker 1>I will present to you that this is Sparta. Uh yeah,

0:05:48.400 --> 0:05:50.840
<v Speaker 1>I mean you bring up the example by illusion. If

0:05:50.880 --> 0:05:53.600
<v Speaker 1>you were only to be trained on modern pop culture,

0:05:53.920 --> 0:05:56.400
<v Speaker 1>you would tend to think of Sparta as very macho.

0:05:56.680 --> 0:05:59.320
<v Speaker 1>So so you might be curious, how could how could

0:05:59.320 --> 0:06:01.640
<v Speaker 1>Sparta be more more pro woman than Athens? Yeah? How

0:06:01.680 --> 0:06:03.599
<v Speaker 1>could a place that is we we've we've come to

0:06:03.880 --> 0:06:07.599
<v Speaker 1>define it by beards and six packs, like what what?

0:06:07.600 --> 0:06:10.800
<v Speaker 1>What in there is empowering to women? Well? Certainly they

0:06:10.800 --> 0:06:15.120
<v Speaker 1>were a militaristic society with little use for literacy. They

0:06:15.160 --> 0:06:19.600
<v Speaker 1>produced no playwrights, philosophers, or historians that that really resonated

0:06:19.600 --> 0:06:24.360
<v Speaker 1>beyond their own age. Their law, which was formulated by Lesurgis,

0:06:24.920 --> 0:06:28.440
<v Speaker 1>was not written down. Everyone had to memorize it instead,

0:06:28.880 --> 0:06:32.240
<v Speaker 1>and Plutarch even reported that there was a Spartan law

0:06:32.360 --> 0:06:37.640
<v Speaker 1>against committing any law to writing. What Yeah crazy? Uh So.

0:06:37.839 --> 0:06:41.640
<v Speaker 1>On the other hand, they of course glorified deprecation and cruelty. Uh.

0:06:41.680 --> 0:06:45.839
<v Speaker 1>Their government was an oligarchy with with definite fascist leanings.

0:06:47.040 --> 0:06:50.479
<v Speaker 1>But then compare this this place to Athens, Okay. Athens

0:06:50.520 --> 0:06:54.240
<v Speaker 1>certainly is a fountain of culture, democracy, law, but it's

0:06:54.240 --> 0:06:57.240
<v Speaker 1>also a place where women were excluded from education, government

0:06:57.240 --> 0:07:00.960
<v Speaker 1>and public affairs. The the Athenian law of her Solon

0:07:01.120 --> 0:07:04.159
<v Speaker 1>denied women the right to buy or sell land, and

0:07:04.400 --> 0:07:07.560
<v Speaker 1>women were just considered property. A father could dissolve his

0:07:07.640 --> 0:07:11.520
<v Speaker 1>daughter's marriage. Uh. And even though the muses were considered

0:07:11.560 --> 0:07:15.920
<v Speaker 1>feminine deities, uh, the artists were not. The artists were male.

0:07:16.040 --> 0:07:19.240
<v Speaker 1>So Sparta, on the other hand, quote educated girls in

0:07:19.320 --> 0:07:23.640
<v Speaker 1>nearly the same manner as boys. Women wore less restrictive clothing,

0:07:24.000 --> 0:07:26.920
<v Speaker 1>and they also competed in athletic games. They ruled the

0:07:26.960 --> 0:07:30.400
<v Speaker 1>household while the men were away at war, and they

0:07:30.480 --> 0:07:33.880
<v Speaker 1>owned and sold property. In fact, by the fourth century

0:07:33.920 --> 0:07:36.920
<v Speaker 1>b C. Women owned two fifths of all Spartan land

0:07:37.040 --> 0:07:40.800
<v Speaker 1>Fritish land. Here's a quote from Slane's book. Spartan's honored

0:07:40.840 --> 0:07:43.760
<v Speaker 1>women's life giving role and considered it equal to that

0:07:43.840 --> 0:07:47.520
<v Speaker 1>of their warriors. To immortalize his name by having it

0:07:47.600 --> 0:07:50.760
<v Speaker 1>inscribed on his tombstone, a Spartan man had to die

0:07:50.800 --> 0:07:53.960
<v Speaker 1>in combat to win the same honor a Spartan woman

0:07:54.000 --> 0:07:58.440
<v Speaker 1>had to perish in childbirth. And another effect that he

0:07:58.480 --> 0:08:03.040
<v Speaker 1>points out is that ATHENI demanded fidelity, virginity, and chastity

0:08:03.040 --> 0:08:06.520
<v Speaker 1>among the women, but Spartan women were not so restrained.

0:08:07.400 --> 0:08:10.280
<v Speaker 1>So again he argues that this, this is a great

0:08:10.320 --> 0:08:12.840
<v Speaker 1>bit of evidence to support his hypothesis, because you have

0:08:13.120 --> 0:08:16.000
<v Speaker 1>you have kind of a wonderful uh uh, you know,

0:08:16.040 --> 0:08:20.640
<v Speaker 1>a versus b testing situation here with with Athens on

0:08:20.640 --> 0:08:22.800
<v Speaker 1>one hand and Sparta on the other. Yeah, these two

0:08:22.800 --> 0:08:25.640
<v Speaker 1>civic societies that, at least if he's correct, he's claiming

0:08:25.640 --> 0:08:29.000
<v Speaker 1>are are very similar, except by the cultural differences that

0:08:29.000 --> 0:08:32.439
<v Speaker 1>are derived from one being highly literate in the elites

0:08:32.480 --> 0:08:34.880
<v Speaker 1>and the other not being so fond of of written

0:08:34.920 --> 0:08:38.200
<v Speaker 1>down words. Yeah, it's a really interesting idea to compare

0:08:38.240 --> 0:08:41.600
<v Speaker 1>the two like that. And I wonder what a scholar

0:08:41.640 --> 0:08:44.079
<v Speaker 1>of ancient Greece would think looking at that. I mean,

0:08:44.080 --> 0:08:47.040
<v Speaker 1>would a scholar of ancient Greece say, yes, those those

0:08:47.080 --> 0:08:51.760
<v Speaker 1>comparisons are valid or or is picking? Yeah, Shlane cherry picking.

0:08:51.800 --> 0:08:54.000
<v Speaker 1>You always gotta wonder if Slane's cherry picking, because I

0:08:54.040 --> 0:08:56.760
<v Speaker 1>get the sense sometimes he may be doing that in

0:08:56.800 --> 0:08:58.960
<v Speaker 1>support of his argument, But at least in the moment

0:08:58.960 --> 0:09:01.160
<v Speaker 1>while you're reading it, it seems very persuasive. Yeah, I

0:09:01.200 --> 0:09:03.280
<v Speaker 1>can't help. But wonder if if one were to really

0:09:03.280 --> 0:09:06.120
<v Speaker 1>get into some of the details of Sparta's brutality, if

0:09:06.120 --> 0:09:09.680
<v Speaker 1>that would um, even that would go against Stoyan's argument here.

0:09:09.720 --> 0:09:12.920
<v Speaker 1>But but but I have not looked at that data yet. Yeah. Hey,

0:09:12.960 --> 0:09:14.760
<v Speaker 1>if you're a listener out there and you are an

0:09:14.760 --> 0:09:17.680
<v Speaker 1>ancient Greek historian or a historian of ancient Greece, especially

0:09:17.720 --> 0:09:20.080
<v Speaker 1>if you're an ancient Greek, if you travel through time,

0:09:20.960 --> 0:09:23.880
<v Speaker 1>do do rings up. We'll get somebody to translate. Yeah,

0:09:23.960 --> 0:09:25.920
<v Speaker 1>but either way, please get in touch with us. Let

0:09:25.960 --> 0:09:27.720
<v Speaker 1>us know what you think about that is. Is that

0:09:27.760 --> 0:09:30.079
<v Speaker 1>on target? Is it bunk? We'd be interested to hear

0:09:30.120 --> 0:09:33.120
<v Speaker 1>your thoughts. Um. But yeah, So he talks about many

0:09:33.160 --> 0:09:36.760
<v Speaker 1>ancient cultures. He talks about ancient Egypt, he talks about Mesopotamia,

0:09:36.800 --> 0:09:39.800
<v Speaker 1>giving examples as he goes throughout of where he sees

0:09:39.840 --> 0:09:42.520
<v Speaker 1>the introduction of the written word or parts of the

0:09:42.600 --> 0:09:47.680
<v Speaker 1>society that favored the written word, causing women's position to

0:09:48.120 --> 0:09:51.040
<v Speaker 1>go into a relative decline and even leading in many

0:09:51.080 --> 0:09:53.800
<v Speaker 1>cases to these types of violent misogyny that we see

0:09:53.880 --> 0:09:56.320
<v Speaker 1>in say, the Code of Hammurabi, the you know, the

0:09:56.320 --> 0:10:00.040
<v Speaker 1>written law codes of ancient Mesopotamia. But I think we

0:10:00.040 --> 0:10:03.040
<v Speaker 1>should look at another interesting example that maybe goes a

0:10:03.080 --> 0:10:05.559
<v Speaker 1>little bit counter to his theory, or at least see

0:10:05.559 --> 0:10:09.160
<v Speaker 1>how he deals with it. And that example would be China.

0:10:09.320 --> 0:10:11.240
<v Speaker 1>So we'll take a look at sh Lane's thoughts on

0:10:11.320 --> 0:10:14.839
<v Speaker 1>ancient China after we come back from this break. Thank you,

0:10:15.040 --> 0:10:18.160
<v Speaker 1>thank you. Alright, we're back, okay. So we were going

0:10:18.200 --> 0:10:22.080
<v Speaker 1>to discuss Leonard Schlane's treatment of ancient China. I was

0:10:22.080 --> 0:10:24.760
<v Speaker 1>curious what he would do with this, because part of

0:10:24.800 --> 0:10:28.560
<v Speaker 1>his idea is that the sequential reading of letters in

0:10:28.640 --> 0:10:32.560
<v Speaker 1>alphabetic script is what tends to favor this like this

0:10:32.720 --> 0:10:35.680
<v Speaker 1>male dominant way of thinking in the brain. But of

0:10:35.720 --> 0:10:38.800
<v Speaker 1>course Chinese script doesn't exactly work that way, right, that's right,

0:10:38.840 --> 0:10:43.199
<v Speaker 1>I mean China. The Chinese language does not have an alphabet,

0:10:43.640 --> 0:10:45.640
<v Speaker 1>so it would seem to be a very difficult thing

0:10:45.720 --> 0:10:48.280
<v Speaker 1>to fit into this theory. So I do want to

0:10:48.320 --> 0:10:51.280
<v Speaker 1>discuss some of the key points that he makes in

0:10:51.360 --> 0:10:55.560
<v Speaker 1>discussing Chinese culture Chinese language. So he points to the

0:10:55.600 --> 0:11:00.440
<v Speaker 1>evidence of preliterate female centric Chinese culture, and indeed there

0:11:00.480 --> 0:11:03.800
<v Speaker 1>are some very powerful goddesses in Chinese myths, such as

0:11:03.800 --> 0:11:07.000
<v Speaker 1>the creatrix goddess uh Nua. But he also makes the

0:11:07.000 --> 0:11:09.840
<v Speaker 1>following points about about Chinese language. He says, there's no

0:11:09.920 --> 0:11:14.000
<v Speaker 1>tensh calligraphy is is visual artistic in ways that Western

0:11:14.080 --> 0:11:17.600
<v Speaker 1>script doesn't have to be. There's more poetry, entity says,

0:11:17.880 --> 0:11:20.280
<v Speaker 1>and and so it would seem to be a right

0:11:20.600 --> 0:11:25.320
<v Speaker 1>hemisphere written language, and there's actually some sided evidence to

0:11:25.320 --> 0:11:28.440
<v Speaker 1>back that up, he says. Quote researchers tested a select

0:11:28.440 --> 0:11:31.520
<v Speaker 1>group of Chinese and English speaking individuals who had learned

0:11:31.559 --> 0:11:34.320
<v Speaker 1>to read and write both languages as small children, and

0:11:34.360 --> 0:11:38.079
<v Speaker 1>who later in life had experienced damage to one hemisphere

0:11:38.240 --> 0:11:41.439
<v Speaker 1>or the other. Right handed Subjects who had damage to

0:11:41.480 --> 0:11:45.000
<v Speaker 1>their left hemispheres lost the ability to speak either Chinese

0:11:45.080 --> 0:11:47.920
<v Speaker 1>or English, and although they could not write English, they

0:11:47.960 --> 0:11:52.120
<v Speaker 1>retained a limited ability to communicate in written Chinese. Those

0:11:52.160 --> 0:11:56.320
<v Speaker 1>with damage to their right hemispheres could still speak Chinese

0:11:56.320 --> 0:11:58.719
<v Speaker 1>and English, and although they could write English, they had

0:11:58.760 --> 0:12:04.280
<v Speaker 1>difficulty writing Chinese. However, Schlein stresses that that all of

0:12:04.559 --> 0:12:07.240
<v Speaker 1>this language, even though it might be tipped a little

0:12:07.280 --> 0:12:09.960
<v Speaker 1>more in the direction of the feminine, it still diminishes

0:12:10.040 --> 0:12:13.960
<v Speaker 1>the role of the nonverbal component of speech. Chinese character

0:12:14.160 --> 0:12:17.120
<v Speaker 1>still must be read in sequence. They and they are,

0:12:17.240 --> 0:12:22.000
<v Speaker 1>as we discussed in the Chinese Typewriter episode abstract inform,

0:12:22.120 --> 0:12:25.760
<v Speaker 1>there's a certain reductionism involved in consuming it. And so

0:12:25.800 --> 0:12:28.559
<v Speaker 1>he argues that the Chinese writing is still much closer

0:12:28.600 --> 0:12:32.559
<v Speaker 1>to the alphabet than it is to oral communication and uh.

0:12:32.600 --> 0:12:36.319
<v Speaker 1>And it's this proximity that makes it a masculizing influence

0:12:36.360 --> 0:12:39.520
<v Speaker 1>on Chinese culture. And he also points out that the

0:12:39.520 --> 0:12:42.800
<v Speaker 1>following he says that quote the tentacles of literacy began

0:12:42.880 --> 0:12:45.560
<v Speaker 1>to wrap around the minds of the Chinese people in

0:12:45.640 --> 0:12:48.800
<v Speaker 1>the sixth century b c. And then this is around

0:12:48.800 --> 0:12:52.839
<v Speaker 1>the same time that Taoism and Confucianism emerge, so that

0:12:52.960 --> 0:12:56.600
<v Speaker 1>this is fascinating. He points out that Taoism embodies feminine values,

0:12:56.920 --> 0:12:59.480
<v Speaker 1>no attempt to control others, and promotes mother Nature as

0:12:59.520 --> 0:13:00.880
<v Speaker 1>a guide. And and this is where we get the

0:13:00.880 --> 0:13:03.600
<v Speaker 1>symbol of the yin yang, of the of of of

0:13:03.679 --> 0:13:07.360
<v Speaker 1>the two opposing forces feminine and masculine. Yeah, he portrays

0:13:07.400 --> 0:13:11.760
<v Speaker 1>Daoism is very is very feminine friendly. Yeah. On the

0:13:11.800 --> 0:13:15.520
<v Speaker 1>other hand, he says that Confucism this touts masculine values,

0:13:15.880 --> 0:13:20.960
<v Speaker 1>UH structures, patriarchal society and UH and and a father culture.

0:13:21.360 --> 0:13:23.960
<v Speaker 1>And so these two systems of belief they coexist in

0:13:24.000 --> 0:13:28.080
<v Speaker 1>relative equilibrium until the Chinese invent the printing press in

0:13:28.679 --> 0:13:35.319
<v Speaker 1>around CE. Literacy rates sore, and soon after Daoism declines

0:13:35.600 --> 0:13:39.560
<v Speaker 1>and Confucism becomes China's dominant belief system. Now, Robert, I

0:13:39.600 --> 0:13:42.079
<v Speaker 1>know you're very interested in Chinese history. How how does

0:13:42.120 --> 0:13:45.240
<v Speaker 1>that square with your understanding of the development and culture

0:13:45.240 --> 0:13:48.920
<v Speaker 1>and the role of Daoism versus Confucism. Well, I love

0:13:50.040 --> 0:13:52.400
<v Speaker 1>the way he's looking at this, uh, this sort of

0:13:52.440 --> 0:13:56.679
<v Speaker 1>tug of war between Taoism and Confucism. But but then

0:13:56.760 --> 0:13:59.120
<v Speaker 1>to come back around and and say, but it's the

0:13:59.480 --> 0:14:02.440
<v Speaker 1>it's the written language that is the key, when clearly

0:14:02.440 --> 0:14:06.520
<v Speaker 1>you have these two different worldviews that are having, you know,

0:14:06.679 --> 0:14:11.480
<v Speaker 1>enormous effect on Chinese culture. Um. I think it's an

0:14:11.520 --> 0:14:15.720
<v Speaker 1>interesting read, but it feels like written language is just

0:14:16.120 --> 0:14:19.120
<v Speaker 1>one of several factors at work here, you know, which

0:14:19.120 --> 0:14:22.760
<v Speaker 1>I guess is kind of my my response to the

0:14:22.760 --> 0:14:26.240
<v Speaker 1>whole hypothesis. Well, I would say that throughout many of

0:14:26.320 --> 0:14:29.920
<v Speaker 1>his discussions in in different times in history. I think

0:14:30.000 --> 0:14:34.640
<v Speaker 1>one problem with his hypothesis is that he over generalizes

0:14:34.960 --> 0:14:41.160
<v Speaker 1>the the pro female or anti female characteristics of cultures

0:14:41.280 --> 0:14:43.920
<v Speaker 1>or ways of thinking. You know, he characters tends to

0:14:44.000 --> 0:14:47.280
<v Speaker 1>characterize something as either like, you know, this this way

0:14:47.280 --> 0:14:50.720
<v Speaker 1>of thinking was very anti woman, or this way of

0:14:50.760 --> 0:14:53.640
<v Speaker 1>thinking was very pro woman, when I think in both

0:14:53.680 --> 0:14:56.440
<v Speaker 1>cases there's usually a little more nuanced than he's letting on.

0:14:56.960 --> 0:15:00.280
<v Speaker 1>I agree, Like one example from the Western history is

0:15:00.320 --> 0:15:04.360
<v Speaker 1>when he gets into the idea of like medieval medieval

0:15:04.400 --> 0:15:09.080
<v Speaker 1>Catholicism being pro woman, but then the Protestant Reformation and

0:15:09.120 --> 0:15:12.920
<v Speaker 1>the subsequent Catholic reaction to the Protestant Reformation being anti woman.

0:15:14.000 --> 0:15:17.000
<v Speaker 1>I think you're more likely to find strong strains of

0:15:17.040 --> 0:15:20.480
<v Speaker 1>misogyny in both, but examples of women breaking through it

0:15:20.520 --> 0:15:22.800
<v Speaker 1>in both cases, right. And then also, of course we're

0:15:22.800 --> 0:15:26.080
<v Speaker 1>realizing that you have varying levels, varying class levels in

0:15:26.120 --> 0:15:30.080
<v Speaker 1>any given um group. So I mean, for instance, in

0:15:30.240 --> 0:15:33.880
<v Speaker 1>medieval Europe, you're gonna have some women who are who

0:15:33.960 --> 0:15:37.760
<v Speaker 1>are nuns and are a part of the religious hierarchy. Uh,

0:15:37.920 --> 0:15:39.480
<v Speaker 1>and then you're gonna have some that are that are

0:15:39.480 --> 0:15:42.440
<v Speaker 1>simply peasants. You're gonna have some that are royalty. Likewise,

0:15:42.560 --> 0:15:45.640
<v Speaker 1>in Chinese history, when you get into the era of footbinding,

0:15:45.680 --> 0:15:47.840
<v Speaker 1>you're going to have you're gonna have members of the

0:15:47.880 --> 0:15:50.960
<v Speaker 1>upper class who are who are who end up being

0:15:51.000 --> 0:15:53.440
<v Speaker 1>a part of footbinding culture. Then you're gonna have women

0:15:53.440 --> 0:15:57.040
<v Speaker 1>in lower classes who can who are not part of it,

0:15:57.120 --> 0:15:59.880
<v Speaker 1>part in many parts in many instances due the fact

0:16:00.080 --> 0:16:02.720
<v Speaker 1>they do have to work and contribute. Not to get

0:16:02.720 --> 0:16:05.640
<v Speaker 1>too much into foot binding, that it's another fascinating and

0:16:05.640 --> 0:16:09.160
<v Speaker 1>disturbing topic all on its own. So in Schlane's book,

0:16:09.160 --> 0:16:11.520
<v Speaker 1>we come back time and time again to the notion

0:16:11.560 --> 0:16:14.440
<v Speaker 1>that the medium is the message. We go from oral

0:16:14.480 --> 0:16:17.880
<v Speaker 1>tradition to written records, eventually compounded by the advent of

0:16:17.880 --> 0:16:22.360
<v Speaker 1>printing press technology. With any key upheavals in society aligned

0:16:22.360 --> 0:16:26.040
<v Speaker 1>and his hypothesis with the with the technology and the

0:16:26.160 --> 0:16:30.760
<v Speaker 1>literacy of its people, masculine powers entrenched themselves. The trend

0:16:30.800 --> 0:16:34.200
<v Speaker 1>continues unabated through the world wars of the twentieth century,

0:16:34.360 --> 0:16:37.880
<v Speaker 1>with some impact from the advent of photography. That's an

0:16:37.960 --> 0:16:42.600
<v Speaker 1>interesting thing. He essentially says that we're retreating back away

0:16:42.640 --> 0:16:45.440
<v Speaker 1>from some of the patriarchy and that women are gaining

0:16:45.440 --> 0:16:49.840
<v Speaker 1>more rights to some degree because of photography and the

0:16:49.880 --> 0:16:53.120
<v Speaker 1>introduction of the importance of the image back into society.

0:16:53.720 --> 0:16:56.240
<v Speaker 1>He even at one point talks about how it used

0:16:56.240 --> 0:16:58.640
<v Speaker 1>to be that a family was fleeing a burning home,

0:16:59.120 --> 0:17:01.160
<v Speaker 1>what would they grab. It would be the family bible.

0:17:01.240 --> 0:17:03.200
<v Speaker 1>That'd be the thing around which all of their family

0:17:03.200 --> 0:17:06.560
<v Speaker 1>memories were centered. It was a word, yeah, the printed text.

0:17:06.880 --> 0:17:09.960
<v Speaker 1>And then after the introduction of photography, it would be

0:17:09.960 --> 0:17:13.600
<v Speaker 1>the family photo album. Yeah. And then then he argues

0:17:13.680 --> 0:17:17.480
<v Speaker 1>that post World War Two, you see this television boom,

0:17:17.760 --> 0:17:21.879
<v Speaker 1>which which he says, really brings the feminine medium to prominence,

0:17:21.880 --> 0:17:25.680
<v Speaker 1>because this again is the triumph of the visual over

0:17:25.720 --> 0:17:29.040
<v Speaker 1>the text. Right. But one thing that's interesting is that

0:17:29.200 --> 0:17:33.159
<v Speaker 1>Schlane isn't always saying that, say, the left brain is

0:17:33.240 --> 0:17:36.120
<v Speaker 1>bad and the right brain is good. Right, that's right.

0:17:36.119 --> 0:17:39.200
<v Speaker 1>He brings up the example of Adolf Hitler's rise to

0:17:39.320 --> 0:17:42.000
<v Speaker 1>power in Germany, which he points out was a highly

0:17:42.080 --> 0:17:45.880
<v Speaker 1>literate nation at the time. And uh, and how did

0:17:45.920 --> 0:17:48.680
<v Speaker 1>Hitler rise to power will through the use of of

0:17:48.720 --> 0:17:51.680
<v Speaker 1>the of radio And he characterizes this is the dark

0:17:51.720 --> 0:17:55.720
<v Speaker 1>side of a sudden shift to right brain culture. Yeah,

0:17:55.760 --> 0:17:59.160
<v Speaker 1>So he says the ideas that Hitler used radio too

0:18:00.119 --> 0:18:04.960
<v Speaker 1>circumvent this sort of organized, sequential left brain thinking of

0:18:05.040 --> 0:18:08.360
<v Speaker 1>the printed word, and goes straight into people's brains by

0:18:08.400 --> 0:18:11.280
<v Speaker 1>talking to them in their ears. Is his quote, Hitler's

0:18:11.359 --> 0:18:13.919
<v Speaker 1>voice buried deep into the depths of the right hemisphere,

0:18:14.000 --> 0:18:17.560
<v Speaker 1>resurrecting tribal myths and rituals. Now, I wonder what he's

0:18:17.560 --> 0:18:20.240
<v Speaker 1>gonna make a twitter. Well, he does touch on the

0:18:20.240 --> 0:18:23.159
<v Speaker 1>Internet age a bit here. He points out that you

0:18:23.200 --> 0:18:26.720
<v Speaker 1>have the the invention of personal computer technology who would great,

0:18:26.760 --> 0:18:29.800
<v Speaker 1>which greatly changes the way people interact. You have graphic

0:18:30.040 --> 0:18:34.240
<v Speaker 1>icons increasingly replacing text commands, and he says that the

0:18:34.280 --> 0:18:37.679
<v Speaker 1>Internet and Worldwide Web are based on feminine images of

0:18:37.840 --> 0:18:40.520
<v Speaker 1>nets and webs. I don't know. That feels like kind

0:18:40.560 --> 0:18:43.119
<v Speaker 1>of a stretch, but but still, well, a lot of

0:18:43.160 --> 0:18:45.240
<v Speaker 1>his associations in the book are kind of stretching, like,

0:18:45.640 --> 0:18:48.760
<v Speaker 1>but then again, we're talking about the realm of symbols

0:18:48.760 --> 0:18:51.480
<v Speaker 1>and the power of symbols, and certainly symbols are powerful.

0:18:51.560 --> 0:18:53.600
<v Speaker 1>Now beyond that, he doesn't get really get much into

0:18:53.640 --> 0:18:56.480
<v Speaker 1>the contemporary world. He died in in two thousand nine

0:18:56.480 --> 0:19:00.679
<v Speaker 1>and this book was published in Uh, there's much I

0:19:00.720 --> 0:19:02.640
<v Speaker 1>think that one might say about the role of say,

0:19:02.680 --> 0:19:07.000
<v Speaker 1>hate speech in the primarily written world of Twitter and Reddit.

0:19:07.480 --> 0:19:09.760
<v Speaker 1>Um And yet at the same time, meme culture makes

0:19:09.840 --> 0:19:13.879
<v Speaker 1>use of images as well, often to drive home some

0:19:14.040 --> 0:19:18.720
<v Speaker 1>rather problematic ideas. Yeah, what about how about podcasts? Right? Well,

0:19:18.760 --> 0:19:22.440
<v Speaker 1>that's true right now, everybody that's listening, that's that's taking

0:19:22.440 --> 0:19:24.479
<v Speaker 1>in this podcast. You were listening to our voices. You're

0:19:24.520 --> 0:19:27.560
<v Speaker 1>not reading it. Um So Yeah, I feel like that

0:19:27.600 --> 0:19:31.240
<v Speaker 1>the world of podcast represents more of the the the

0:19:31.680 --> 0:19:35.479
<v Speaker 1>feminine energy that he's he describes in his book. There

0:19:35.520 --> 0:19:37.800
<v Speaker 1>are quite a few reasons that he seems to think

0:19:37.800 --> 0:19:41.280
<v Speaker 1>that the modern technological situation is going to be a

0:19:41.320 --> 0:19:45.600
<v Speaker 1>positive thing for the elimination of the influence of patriarchy.

0:19:46.240 --> 0:19:49.880
<v Speaker 1>One of which is that you've got photography and imagery everywhere.

0:19:50.119 --> 0:19:52.840
<v Speaker 1>Another one of which is that we depend now so

0:19:52.920 --> 0:19:56.920
<v Speaker 1>much on electricity, which he characterizes is as always being

0:19:56.920 --> 0:20:00.280
<v Speaker 1>described in terms of feminine power or him and in

0:20:00.440 --> 0:20:05.679
<v Speaker 1>type words. Another thing is that the keyboard has very

0:20:05.760 --> 0:20:08.920
<v Speaker 1>much changed the way we compose even written texts. Now,

0:20:09.040 --> 0:20:11.720
<v Speaker 1>the previous idea of how you'd compose a written text

0:20:12.040 --> 0:20:13.919
<v Speaker 1>would be that you'd write it out by hand with

0:20:13.960 --> 0:20:16.960
<v Speaker 1>your dominant hand, which is controlled by the dominant hemisphere

0:20:16.960 --> 0:20:18.760
<v Speaker 1>of the brain. So if you're a right handed person,

0:20:19.240 --> 0:20:23.280
<v Speaker 1>left hemisphere dominant brain, you'd be writing with that hemisphere.

0:20:23.640 --> 0:20:27.080
<v Speaker 1>But now we type with both hands, and so if

0:20:27.080 --> 0:20:30.119
<v Speaker 1>you're composing things on a keyboard or on a typewriter,

0:20:30.680 --> 0:20:33.280
<v Speaker 1>maybe that would somehow circumvent part of the way that

0:20:33.359 --> 0:20:35.919
<v Speaker 1>he believes that the left brain has been dominant in

0:20:35.960 --> 0:20:39.320
<v Speaker 1>alphabetic cultures. He even points to the fact that when

0:20:39.480 --> 0:20:44.080
<v Speaker 1>typewriters first came into prominence, the people who mainly focused

0:20:44.080 --> 0:20:47.240
<v Speaker 1>on typing for a living were women, and that typing

0:20:47.400 --> 0:20:49.680
<v Speaker 1>was seen as like it was kind of men who

0:20:49.720 --> 0:20:52.960
<v Speaker 1>were trying to get into typing were tweeted dismissively. Is like, oh,

0:20:53.040 --> 0:20:56.520
<v Speaker 1>that's the thing for women to do. That's a great point, yeah,

0:20:57.440 --> 0:20:59.560
<v Speaker 1>and not something I would have necessarily thought about going

0:20:59.560 --> 0:21:01.720
<v Speaker 1>into this spite. I mean, we had the fact that

0:21:01.720 --> 0:21:06.159
<v Speaker 1>we had a whole episode that that discussed the the

0:21:06.200 --> 0:21:09.159
<v Speaker 1>technology of typewriters and its effect on culture. Now, I

0:21:09.160 --> 0:21:13.600
<v Speaker 1>will say Slane was optimistic about where we were headed

0:21:13.680 --> 0:21:17.440
<v Speaker 1>and what our trajectory was. Slash is as a as

0:21:17.440 --> 0:21:20.840
<v Speaker 1>a people should be consider this a disproof of his hypothesis.

0:21:21.400 --> 0:21:22.879
<v Speaker 1>It depends how you look at it. Again, you have

0:21:22.960 --> 0:21:26.280
<v Speaker 1>to you have to think about the various uh um

0:21:26.440 --> 0:21:30.000
<v Speaker 1>um you know, peaks and valleys in this various timeline

0:21:30.040 --> 0:21:33.760
<v Speaker 1>of feminine versus masculine. Yeah, it's true, we shouldn't. You know.

0:21:33.800 --> 0:21:36.040
<v Speaker 1>It's easy to be negative about how things are in

0:21:36.080 --> 0:21:39.000
<v Speaker 1>the present. You know, you have that bias, nativity bias,

0:21:39.080 --> 0:21:41.960
<v Speaker 1>and it's like, you know, you'll give it some time.

0:21:42.000 --> 0:21:43.520
<v Speaker 1>You had a few decades and then you can see

0:21:43.520 --> 0:21:45.119
<v Speaker 1>how things were. But this is this is what he

0:21:45.119 --> 0:21:47.880
<v Speaker 1>said in his epilogue. He said, quote, I am convinced

0:21:47.880 --> 0:21:50.000
<v Speaker 1>we are entering a new golden age, one in which

0:21:50.040 --> 0:21:53.720
<v Speaker 1>the right hemispheric values of tolerance, caring, and respect for

0:21:53.800 --> 0:21:56.679
<v Speaker 1>nature will we begin to ameliorate the conditions that have

0:21:56.800 --> 0:21:59.720
<v Speaker 1>prevailed for the too long period during which the left

0:21:59.800 --> 0:22:03.600
<v Speaker 1>him spheric values were dominant. Images of any kind are

0:22:03.640 --> 0:22:07.200
<v Speaker 1>the bomb bringing about this worldwide healing. I will take

0:22:07.240 --> 0:22:10.920
<v Speaker 1>more time for change to permeate and alterate world cultures,

0:22:10.960 --> 0:22:13.920
<v Speaker 1>but there can be no doubt that the wondrous um

0:22:13.960 --> 0:22:18.560
<v Speaker 1>permutations of photography and electromagnetism are transforming the world, both

0:22:18.600 --> 0:22:22.520
<v Speaker 1>physically and psychically. The shift to write hemispheric values through

0:22:22.520 --> 0:22:25.119
<v Speaker 1>the perception of images can be expected to increase the

0:22:25.160 --> 0:22:28.560
<v Speaker 1>sum total awareness of beauty. Yeah, one could hope some

0:22:28.680 --> 0:22:31.080
<v Speaker 1>version of that is true, you know. And in the

0:22:31.080 --> 0:22:32.679
<v Speaker 1>book he does point out that when you look at

0:22:32.680 --> 0:22:36.320
<v Speaker 1>the twentieth century, what are two of the most um

0:22:38.320 --> 0:22:41.520
<v Speaker 1>widespread images, like what, what are two pictures that are

0:22:41.560 --> 0:22:44.159
<v Speaker 1>probably going to show up in any discussion of the

0:22:44.160 --> 0:22:48.439
<v Speaker 1>twentieth century? And one is the picture of Earth as

0:22:48.480 --> 0:22:51.840
<v Speaker 1>a whole from space, and then the other is, uh

0:22:52.400 --> 0:22:55.159
<v Speaker 1>is the the detonation of an atomic bomb. There's a

0:22:55.200 --> 0:22:58.919
<v Speaker 1>sense of revelation in the photo in in the photograph

0:22:59.000 --> 0:23:02.000
<v Speaker 1>that is that it's harder to grasp in the word

0:23:02.040 --> 0:23:04.679
<v Speaker 1>I guess, or it's or at least it's it's harder,

0:23:05.080 --> 0:23:07.280
<v Speaker 1>it takes longer to convey the meaning. When I think

0:23:07.320 --> 0:23:10.160
<v Speaker 1>about those two images juxtaposed with one another, I think,

0:23:10.320 --> 0:23:12.640
<v Speaker 1>you know, they both kind of indicate that line from

0:23:12.680 --> 0:23:15.880
<v Speaker 1>Auden's poem September one, ninety nine where he just says

0:23:15.960 --> 0:23:18.639
<v Speaker 1>we must love one another or die. I have a

0:23:18.680 --> 0:23:20.840
<v Speaker 1>feeling we're going to come back to that that kind

0:23:20.840 --> 0:23:23.320
<v Speaker 1>of proposal at the very end of this episode. Okay,

0:23:23.320 --> 0:23:25.040
<v Speaker 1>but first let's take a quick break, and when we

0:23:25.080 --> 0:23:30.879
<v Speaker 1>come back, we'll discuss some criticisms of Slane's argument. Thank you, alright,

0:23:30.920 --> 0:23:32.760
<v Speaker 1>we're back. So I guess at the end here we

0:23:32.800 --> 0:23:37.160
<v Speaker 1>should focus on a few general criticisms of Slane's theory.

0:23:37.200 --> 0:23:40.040
<v Speaker 1>I mean we we've peppered some of our critical thoughts throughout.

0:23:40.600 --> 0:23:43.400
<v Speaker 1>I don't want to sound too critical because on one hand,

0:23:43.440 --> 0:23:46.679
<v Speaker 1>I do think he brings up a lot of interesting

0:23:46.720 --> 0:23:49.520
<v Speaker 1>ideas and this is actually a book worth reading, even

0:23:49.600 --> 0:23:52.960
<v Speaker 1>though I think in the end I'm not persuaded by

0:23:53.040 --> 0:23:56.640
<v Speaker 1>his main argument, and I think his style of argumentation

0:23:56.800 --> 0:24:00.080
<v Speaker 1>is very loosey goosey, And it is important to and

0:24:00.200 --> 0:24:02.080
<v Speaker 1>drive home that it is. It is an argument, It

0:24:02.160 --> 0:24:05.080
<v Speaker 1>is a hypothesis. Is that he has not written the

0:24:05.119 --> 0:24:07.840
<v Speaker 1>Bible for us here and say here, here is the

0:24:07.920 --> 0:24:11.440
<v Speaker 1>absolute word he's saying, this is my hypothesis. And here's

0:24:11.440 --> 0:24:14.280
<v Speaker 1>how I would support that with our with with the

0:24:14.320 --> 0:24:21.040
<v Speaker 1>existing body of scientific, historical, cultural, archaeological evidence. Yes, I

0:24:21.119 --> 0:24:24.240
<v Speaker 1>do want to mention briefly one critical review, which was

0:24:24.320 --> 0:24:27.600
<v Speaker 1>by the science writer Sandra Blakesley. If you're writing any

0:24:27.640 --> 0:24:30.040
<v Speaker 1>of her books, Robert, I don't believe so I think

0:24:30.080 --> 0:24:33.040
<v Speaker 1>I might there's one I've been looking at that was

0:24:33.160 --> 0:24:36.399
<v Speaker 1>about um. But she writes a lot about topics related

0:24:36.440 --> 0:24:38.920
<v Speaker 1>to neuroscience, and she co authored this book about how

0:24:38.960 --> 0:24:42.120
<v Speaker 1>stage magic can show us certain ways our mind plays

0:24:42.160 --> 0:24:45.200
<v Speaker 1>tricks on us. It seemed kind of interesting. I think

0:24:45.200 --> 0:24:47.399
<v Speaker 1>it's called Slights of Mind. But anyway, she wrote a

0:24:47.400 --> 0:24:51.120
<v Speaker 1>critical review for The New York Times in nine and

0:24:51.240 --> 0:24:54.800
<v Speaker 1>her main criticism is just that the book is she

0:24:54.840 --> 0:24:58.879
<v Speaker 1>accuses Schlaane of peddling just so stories. Now, this is

0:24:58.880 --> 0:25:02.840
<v Speaker 1>a term that often comes up to describe historical narrative

0:25:02.880 --> 0:25:06.400
<v Speaker 1>explanations for things that are offered without proof. And one

0:25:06.400 --> 0:25:09.560
<v Speaker 1>example would be I think this was actually somewhere in

0:25:09.560 --> 0:25:11.840
<v Speaker 1>the book, if I remember right. But anyway, why do

0:25:11.960 --> 0:25:16.000
<v Speaker 1>men in some cultures wear neckties? Well, let's say the

0:25:16.000 --> 0:25:20.280
<v Speaker 1>answer is it's because in our evolutionary history, dangling genitalia

0:25:20.480 --> 0:25:22.600
<v Speaker 1>was a sign of virility in males, and it was

0:25:22.640 --> 0:25:24.919
<v Speaker 1>a sign of good mate quality. So men want to

0:25:24.920 --> 0:25:27.880
<v Speaker 1>show off some kind of dangling object to set off

0:25:27.920 --> 0:25:31.439
<v Speaker 1>the same responses, so they wear neckties. Now, notice I

0:25:31.480 --> 0:25:34.800
<v Speaker 1>didn't provide any evidence that that's the reason. It's basically

0:25:34.840 --> 0:25:38.639
<v Speaker 1>just like I told a plausible story. I told a

0:25:38.720 --> 0:25:40.879
<v Speaker 1>story and you say, oh, I can see how that

0:25:40.960 --> 0:25:44.400
<v Speaker 1>might be the case. And these types of explanations are

0:25:44.440 --> 0:25:48.320
<v Speaker 1>often referred to pejoratively as just so stories. I just

0:25:48.440 --> 0:25:50.639
<v Speaker 1>told you a story, and well, that's just how it is,

0:25:50.760 --> 0:25:52.560
<v Speaker 1>and it has that kind of truthiness to it, and

0:25:52.600 --> 0:25:54.479
<v Speaker 1>so you just buy into it. Yeah. Now, I do

0:25:54.560 --> 0:25:57.879
<v Speaker 1>think that the accusation of being a just so story

0:25:58.080 --> 0:26:03.119
<v Speaker 1>is unfairly leveled sometimes that explanations based in evolutionary anthropology

0:26:03.200 --> 0:26:07.439
<v Speaker 1>and psychology, because you know, after all, a hypothesis is

0:26:07.440 --> 0:26:12.200
<v Speaker 1>often just an unproven, plausible explanation that's awaiting some supporting evidence.

0:26:12.480 --> 0:26:14.959
<v Speaker 1>And so sometimes I think you see attacks on things,

0:26:15.640 --> 0:26:19.120
<v Speaker 1>uh that attacks on things, calling them just so stories,

0:26:19.200 --> 0:26:21.600
<v Speaker 1>when really what you should be doing is, well, you know,

0:26:21.680 --> 0:26:24.000
<v Speaker 1>let's allow people some room to speculate. It's okay to

0:26:24.040 --> 0:26:27.080
<v Speaker 1>speculate as long as you remember what you're doing. You know,

0:26:27.160 --> 0:26:29.480
<v Speaker 1>you're not saying like, well, here's the facts, this is

0:26:29.480 --> 0:26:32.440
<v Speaker 1>how it is. You're saying, hey, what if this were true?

0:26:32.840 --> 0:26:34.800
<v Speaker 1>Would that you know, could we find some evidence to

0:26:34.840 --> 0:26:38.399
<v Speaker 1>support it? Yeah. It's not like say a conspiracy theory,

0:26:38.440 --> 0:26:41.640
<v Speaker 1>where you're saying, uh, where you're exploring that you're leaning

0:26:41.680 --> 0:26:45.159
<v Speaker 1>a bit too heavily into the what if exactly, And

0:26:45.200 --> 0:26:47.760
<v Speaker 1>you definitely can lean a little bit too heavily into

0:26:47.800 --> 0:26:49.960
<v Speaker 1>the what if, And I think maybe she Layne does

0:26:50.000 --> 0:26:53.679
<v Speaker 1>that in the book. I think we're slippery creatures. Often,

0:26:53.720 --> 0:26:56.280
<v Speaker 1>in the heat of our zeal to explain things, we

0:26:56.359 --> 0:26:59.600
<v Speaker 1>sort of forget that the ideas were entertaining for the

0:27:00.000 --> 0:27:04.160
<v Speaker 1>purpose of speculation are just speculation and want of good evidence,

0:27:04.480 --> 0:27:07.640
<v Speaker 1>we start treating them as if the last thing I speculated, well,

0:27:07.680 --> 0:27:09.840
<v Speaker 1>We've got that proven. Now now I'm moving on to

0:27:09.920 --> 0:27:13.520
<v Speaker 1>the next thing, when really you haven't proven anything in

0:27:13.600 --> 0:27:17.000
<v Speaker 1>any step. You're just offering a lot of plausible, possible

0:27:17.080 --> 0:27:20.399
<v Speaker 1>explanations in a row. Yeah, and run the risk of

0:27:20.440 --> 0:27:24.439
<v Speaker 1>creating something that is more like a religious framework for

0:27:24.600 --> 0:27:28.560
<v Speaker 1>understanding the past. Not that I'm saying that that this

0:27:28.640 --> 0:27:32.199
<v Speaker 1>is religion or aspiring to be religion, but sometimes I

0:27:32.240 --> 0:27:34.560
<v Speaker 1>feel like say that I feel that something like the

0:27:35.080 --> 0:27:40.840
<v Speaker 1>um the bicameral mind kind of it satisfies me. It

0:27:40.960 --> 0:27:43.840
<v Speaker 1>satisfies me in ways that I might look to religion

0:27:43.840 --> 0:27:46.040
<v Speaker 1>to satisfy me, and that it can it gives me

0:27:46.600 --> 0:27:50.119
<v Speaker 1>a model upon which I might make sense of the

0:27:50.160 --> 0:27:54.120
<v Speaker 1>mysteries of the past. Yeah, it satisfies you because it's

0:27:54.160 --> 0:27:57.560
<v Speaker 1>interesting and because it gives you a way of contemplating

0:27:57.640 --> 0:28:01.000
<v Speaker 1>possible answers to two questions you you're probably never going

0:28:01.040 --> 0:28:04.480
<v Speaker 1>to have a really solid evidential answer for, you know,

0:28:04.560 --> 0:28:07.760
<v Speaker 1>that kind of thing. And that's why, you know, hypotheses

0:28:07.880 --> 0:28:11.840
<v Speaker 1>like this and like the bicameral mind are interesting exactly

0:28:11.960 --> 0:28:16.000
<v Speaker 1>for this reason. They take a really big fundamental question

0:28:16.119 --> 0:28:19.440
<v Speaker 1>or really big fundamental issue, offers some kind of radical

0:28:19.600 --> 0:28:22.639
<v Speaker 1>solution to it, and then they range over all different

0:28:22.640 --> 0:28:26.080
<v Speaker 1>types of subject matter and across different disciplines, drawing on

0:28:26.160 --> 0:28:29.520
<v Speaker 1>different types of evidence to to answer it. And so

0:28:29.880 --> 0:28:33.000
<v Speaker 1>for some reason that process is really fun. Like to

0:28:33.160 --> 0:28:37.240
<v Speaker 1>engage in that game of solving the puzzle and ranging

0:28:37.280 --> 0:28:39.640
<v Speaker 1>across all these different disciplines and going to all these

0:28:39.640 --> 0:28:42.800
<v Speaker 1>different places in history. It feels very good, at least

0:28:42.800 --> 0:28:46.080
<v Speaker 1>to me, it does. It. It's very satisfying, an emotionally

0:28:46.160 --> 0:28:50.520
<v Speaker 1>exciting journey. I'm not sure it necessarily provides the best,

0:28:50.720 --> 0:28:54.680
<v Speaker 1>strongest explanations for things. Yeah, it's like you're looking for shape.

0:28:54.680 --> 0:28:58.640
<v Speaker 1>It provides a shape. Is it the shape? Well maybe not,

0:28:59.000 --> 0:29:01.840
<v Speaker 1>but it forces you to ask questions. So then why

0:29:01.920 --> 0:29:05.760
<v Speaker 1>does this shape line up with at least certain aspects

0:29:05.760 --> 0:29:09.040
<v Speaker 1>of realities we understand it? And that's where that's where

0:29:09.080 --> 0:29:13.840
<v Speaker 1>it becomes such a a fascinating internal exploration. Now, one

0:29:13.880 --> 0:29:16.520
<v Speaker 1>way in which I would actually compare the b Cameral

0:29:16.560 --> 0:29:18.960
<v Speaker 1>Mind favorably to this book is that I think that

0:29:19.000 --> 0:29:21.320
<v Speaker 1>Bi Camera, I think that Julian James is actually a

0:29:21.360 --> 0:29:26.160
<v Speaker 1>little bit more cautious than than Slayne is. I don't

0:29:26.160 --> 0:29:27.520
<v Speaker 1>know if you'd agree with that, but I feel like

0:29:27.560 --> 0:29:34.240
<v Speaker 1>he tends to take things slower and makes fewer broad generalizations. Yeah, yeah,

0:29:34.240 --> 0:29:36.840
<v Speaker 1>I would say so. And uh, you know, Julian Jayes

0:29:36.880 --> 0:29:39.840
<v Speaker 1>also was He seemed willing to say is this right?

0:29:39.880 --> 0:29:41.600
<v Speaker 1>I don't know this is? But what this is the

0:29:41.640 --> 0:29:45.600
<v Speaker 1>model I'm presenting? You know, he would, well, and she

0:29:45.720 --> 0:29:48.280
<v Speaker 1>Leyne does that in his opening He basically says, this

0:29:48.360 --> 0:29:50.800
<v Speaker 1>whole book is a hypothesis. But then if you read

0:29:50.880 --> 0:29:54.200
<v Speaker 1>sentence to sentence throughout the rest of it, he doesn't

0:29:54.200 --> 0:29:57.360
<v Speaker 1>he doesn't continually acknowledge that. Well, but then again he

0:29:57.480 --> 0:30:01.320
<v Speaker 1>is making an impassioned argument for it, and the kind

0:30:01.320 --> 0:30:04.320
<v Speaker 1>of right brained argument. Yeah, so you kind of and

0:30:04.400 --> 0:30:06.000
<v Speaker 1>and I guess that's kind of a trap one risk

0:30:06.040 --> 0:30:08.959
<v Speaker 1>falling into as a writer that you you become so

0:30:09.080 --> 0:30:12.440
<v Speaker 1>passionate about the theory that you're not stopping every few

0:30:12.480 --> 0:30:16.320
<v Speaker 1>paragraphs to remind everybody that's a hypothesis. I should also

0:30:16.400 --> 0:30:18.720
<v Speaker 1>point out in my saying this that I have read

0:30:18.880 --> 0:30:23.440
<v Speaker 1>more of Julian Jayne's work, like from from different points

0:30:23.440 --> 0:30:26.920
<v Speaker 1>in his career, and I have only read um this

0:30:26.960 --> 0:30:29.760
<v Speaker 1>one work of Schlaine's, and he has written other books,

0:30:29.760 --> 0:30:31.520
<v Speaker 1>So I don't know if this is I don't know

0:30:31.520 --> 0:30:34.360
<v Speaker 1>to what extent he comes back and subsequent um um

0:30:34.960 --> 0:30:38.400
<v Speaker 1>his subsequent writings and and sort of revisits any of this. Yeah,

0:30:38.440 --> 0:30:41.040
<v Speaker 1>I'd be interested to see that. I mean I I

0:30:41.200 --> 0:30:44.160
<v Speaker 1>so I didn't find anything about this theory being picked

0:30:44.280 --> 0:30:47.640
<v Speaker 1>up in an academic context. I mean Slaine was writing

0:30:47.640 --> 0:30:51.240
<v Speaker 1>for a popular audience, so he makes the argument in

0:30:51.280 --> 0:30:53.280
<v Speaker 1>a in a popular kind of way, and I think

0:30:53.320 --> 0:30:56.640
<v Speaker 1>that probably also gives him the freedom to take some

0:30:56.800 --> 0:31:00.480
<v Speaker 1>license with making kind of broad generalizations when he talks

0:31:00.520 --> 0:31:04.160
<v Speaker 1>like the Greeks were like this, and you know, the

0:31:04.360 --> 0:31:07.800
<v Speaker 1>right brain is like this, and men are like this

0:31:08.120 --> 0:31:12.200
<v Speaker 1>in every case, like the critical reader and me wants

0:31:12.240 --> 0:31:14.520
<v Speaker 1>to put a big asterisk every time he says something

0:31:14.560 --> 0:31:16.120
<v Speaker 1>like that and be like, well, wait a minute, So

0:31:16.160 --> 0:31:18.280
<v Speaker 1>you're saying, like, in what percent of the time is

0:31:18.320 --> 0:31:21.080
<v Speaker 1>it like that? How this also sounds like a great

0:31:21.560 --> 0:31:25.120
<v Speaker 1>framework for stand up comedy routine, the alphabet versus the

0:31:25.160 --> 0:31:28.280
<v Speaker 1>goddess as stand up I like it. All Right, we're

0:31:28.280 --> 0:31:29.920
<v Speaker 1>basically out of time here, but I do want to

0:31:29.920 --> 0:31:33.160
<v Speaker 1>touch on one last topic, one last goddess, and that

0:31:33.280 --> 0:31:37.840
<v Speaker 1>goddess is goes Er. Well let's goes there. Yeah, So

0:31:38.120 --> 0:31:42.920
<v Speaker 1>I am talking about the fictional entity from the the

0:31:43.040 --> 0:31:46.720
<v Speaker 1>film Ghostbusters goes through the Gazarian, goes through the destructor,

0:31:46.880 --> 0:31:50.600
<v Speaker 1>goes through the Traveler, et cetera, an entity of many names.

0:31:50.720 --> 0:31:55.160
<v Speaker 1>I have a question is Goeser in Anna? I think

0:31:55.840 --> 0:31:58.560
<v Speaker 1>should they say she's supposed to be Sumerian? She is

0:31:59.000 --> 0:32:01.320
<v Speaker 1>described as being a Sumerian, so she's a She's a

0:32:01.360 --> 0:32:05.600
<v Speaker 1>Type seven for starters. That's her like her spirit ranking

0:32:05.640 --> 0:32:09.440
<v Speaker 1>within the Ghostbusters um system. And we're told that it

0:32:09.560 --> 0:32:12.960
<v Speaker 1>was worshiped as a goddess by the Sumerians around six

0:32:13.040 --> 0:32:18.400
<v Speaker 1>thousand BC. That's significantly earlier than any Anana we know about, right,

0:32:18.440 --> 0:32:21.239
<v Speaker 1>So the timeline is not going to perfectly line up

0:32:21.280 --> 0:32:23.320
<v Speaker 1>with what we've been talking about here. For instance, we

0:32:23.480 --> 0:32:26.880
<v Speaker 1>were talking about how Marduk worship began to to rise

0:32:26.920 --> 0:32:31.920
<v Speaker 1>in sec etcetera. But anyway, I do want to ask

0:32:31.960 --> 0:32:35.800
<v Speaker 1>everyone to consider consider the following in regards to Gozer.

0:32:36.360 --> 0:32:41.640
<v Speaker 1>So Gozer is a world destroying traveler, yet despite her

0:32:41.680 --> 0:32:44.960
<v Speaker 1>worship in ancient times, she did not lay waste to

0:32:45.040 --> 0:32:49.200
<v Speaker 1>the ancient world. Why not? Well, uh, let's let's remember

0:32:49.240 --> 0:32:53.240
<v Speaker 1>what we know about how Gozer functions. So Gozer's form

0:32:53.440 --> 0:32:58.120
<v Speaker 1>is chosen by the mortals it encounters our heroes and ghostbusters.

0:32:58.200 --> 0:33:01.520
<v Speaker 1>Imagine it is a Imagine it as a seemingly harmless

0:33:01.600 --> 0:33:06.600
<v Speaker 1>yet masculine corporate logo, and it's still rampages. Oh the marshmallow. Yeah.

0:33:06.760 --> 0:33:10.880
<v Speaker 1>The ancient Sumerians, however, chose the form of a goddess,

0:33:11.520 --> 0:33:14.760
<v Speaker 1>one attended to by a pair of demi gods representing

0:33:14.880 --> 0:33:18.920
<v Speaker 1>each gender, both the vins Clortho the key Master and

0:33:19.040 --> 0:33:21.920
<v Speaker 1>Zul the Gatekeeper, and they seem to share equal footing

0:33:21.960 --> 0:33:24.800
<v Speaker 1>in their service to Gozer. Oh man, I'd say, if anything,

0:33:24.880 --> 0:33:27.920
<v Speaker 1>Zul is more powerful than Vince clarthough I don't know. Well,

0:33:28.960 --> 0:33:31.760
<v Speaker 1>it's hard, Well, can Evince Claro can do is just

0:33:31.840 --> 0:33:34.880
<v Speaker 1>run around saying your parish in flames. Here, you're thinking

0:33:34.960 --> 0:33:40.000
<v Speaker 1>of the of potential um complications based on their mortal hosts.

0:33:41.120 --> 0:33:46.520
<v Speaker 1>So yeah, Sigourney Weaver's character clearly the more powerful human

0:33:46.520 --> 0:33:48.720
<v Speaker 1>host that was chosen. Well, I'm sorry for jumping me on.

0:33:48.800 --> 0:33:52.360
<v Speaker 1>I will wait for the sign. Okay. So this is

0:33:52.400 --> 0:33:56.240
<v Speaker 1>my theory. Gozer does not destroy the ancient world because

0:33:56.320 --> 0:34:00.280
<v Speaker 1>it manifested during a time of goddess worship and was

0:34:00.320 --> 0:34:02.719
<v Speaker 1>bound to a form, bound to a form by a

0:34:02.840 --> 0:34:06.400
<v Speaker 1>right brain culture rather than a left brain culture. So

0:34:06.480 --> 0:34:09.160
<v Speaker 1>the true way to avoid extinction at the hands of

0:34:09.239 --> 0:34:13.319
<v Speaker 1>gozer Uh is to choose a form that emanates from

0:34:13.440 --> 0:34:16.880
<v Speaker 1>right brain qualities, or at least a more balanced mind state.

0:34:16.920 --> 0:34:20.200
<v Speaker 1>The modern brain, especially the modern male brain, is so

0:34:20.280 --> 0:34:24.279
<v Speaker 1>dominated than by the left brain the alphabet and infected

0:34:24.520 --> 0:34:29.359
<v Speaker 1>patriarchal energy that that even a cartoon marshmallow Man can

0:34:29.400 --> 0:34:32.360
<v Speaker 1>be nothing but a force of conquest in mass slaughter.

0:34:33.400 --> 0:34:35.359
<v Speaker 1>And perhaps I'll even go so far as to say

0:34:35.360 --> 0:34:38.960
<v Speaker 1>maybe that's Gozer's true purpose, to wipe left brain dominated

0:34:39.000 --> 0:34:42.799
<v Speaker 1>species from the cosmos, because right brain dominated species are

0:34:42.840 --> 0:34:46.759
<v Speaker 1>going to see it as a goddess. Now there is

0:34:46.800 --> 0:34:50.040
<v Speaker 1>actually a great idea for a sci fi fantasy story.

0:34:50.200 --> 0:34:55.880
<v Speaker 1>You've got like a hemispheric lateralization culture where one side

0:34:55.880 --> 0:34:59.040
<v Speaker 1>brain culture fears being taken over by the other side

0:34:59.040 --> 0:35:04.040
<v Speaker 1>brain culture and they create a memetic weapon to destroy it. Yeah,

0:35:04.120 --> 0:35:06.000
<v Speaker 1>look at that. And we're giving it away for free

0:35:06.280 --> 0:35:08.680
<v Speaker 1>right here. We're not giving it away. You can't use it.

0:35:09.239 --> 0:35:15.680
<v Speaker 1>But but but yeah, inevitably, in talking about gods and goddesses,

0:35:15.719 --> 0:35:18.520
<v Speaker 1>I can't help but come back to fictional entities in

0:35:18.840 --> 0:35:22.960
<v Speaker 1>uh books and movies, and uh, it's really it's really

0:35:22.960 --> 0:35:24.880
<v Speaker 1>given me a new respect for Ghoser, not that I

0:35:24.920 --> 0:35:28.200
<v Speaker 1>ever disrespected Gozer. To be clear, anyway, you should tune

0:35:28.200 --> 0:35:32.600
<v Speaker 1>into our upcoming fictional podcast, The Ancient brain Bomb. I

0:35:32.640 --> 0:35:35.360
<v Speaker 1>mean it is telling to that Gozer is then defeated

0:35:35.360 --> 0:35:40.919
<v Speaker 1>in Ghostbusters by a pack of men with phallic lightning swords. Yeah,

0:35:41.360 --> 0:35:43.719
<v Speaker 1>so predictable. And hey, I'm gonna say it here. As

0:35:43.760 --> 0:35:45.520
<v Speaker 1>funny as the movie is, as much as you love

0:35:45.560 --> 0:35:48.040
<v Speaker 1>the character, is that Binkman, he's not a nice guy.

0:35:48.520 --> 0:35:51.960
<v Speaker 1>He's no, he's he's a patriarchal jerk. Yeah, And so

0:35:51.960 --> 0:35:53.840
<v Speaker 1>that you have it a little bit of Ghostbusters to

0:35:53.920 --> 0:35:58.200
<v Speaker 1>cap off an exploration of the alphabet versus the Goddess. Now,

0:35:58.239 --> 0:36:00.759
<v Speaker 1>I think we should try to come back to some

0:36:00.840 --> 0:36:03.360
<v Speaker 1>of the more interesting questions raised by this book in

0:36:03.400 --> 0:36:05.080
<v Speaker 1>the future. I want to come back to the idea

0:36:05.080 --> 0:36:09.400
<v Speaker 1>of visual perception styles affecting the perception of time, uh,

0:36:09.600 --> 0:36:12.960
<v Speaker 1>the way that the way that our media really do

0:36:13.400 --> 0:36:15.239
<v Speaker 1>shape us. I mean, I'm sure there's all kinds of

0:36:15.239 --> 0:36:20.000
<v Speaker 1>research on how on how keyboard driven communication is changing

0:36:20.080 --> 0:36:23.120
<v Speaker 1>the what people communicate. Yeah, indeed. Plus there's so many

0:36:23.280 --> 0:36:26.040
<v Speaker 1>just little, you know, brief moments in the book where

0:36:26.040 --> 0:36:29.160
<v Speaker 1>he touches on this culture or that or or For instance,

0:36:29.160 --> 0:36:31.000
<v Speaker 1>there's a bit where he talks about the Sistine Chapel

0:36:31.360 --> 0:36:33.200
<v Speaker 1>and I realized, oh man, there are a number of

0:36:33.280 --> 0:36:36.520
<v Speaker 1>kind of cool uh reads on the Sistine Chapel that

0:36:36.560 --> 0:36:39.040
<v Speaker 1>have come out over the years. Would be neat to

0:36:39.080 --> 0:36:41.480
<v Speaker 1>corral them all into a single podcast. He's got a

0:36:41.480 --> 0:36:45.600
<v Speaker 1>really interesting and really fun chapter on Dionysus and the

0:36:45.680 --> 0:36:48.520
<v Speaker 1>mine Ads and and that kind of stuff in ancient Greece.

0:36:48.719 --> 0:36:52.160
<v Speaker 1>I actually think it doesn't help his art, doesn't help

0:36:52.160 --> 0:36:56.759
<v Speaker 1>his overall argument all that well, but it's just interesting

0:36:56.800 --> 0:36:59.520
<v Speaker 1>to revisit his treatment of it. On its own and

0:36:59.520 --> 0:37:01.719
<v Speaker 1>again if you want to check out the book and

0:37:01.760 --> 0:37:04.120
<v Speaker 1>its entirety, I will I'm going to include a link

0:37:04.280 --> 0:37:06.520
<v Speaker 1>to it on the landing page for this episode of

0:37:06.520 --> 0:37:08.279
<v Speaker 1>Stuff to Blow Your Mind dot com, as well as

0:37:08.280 --> 0:37:10.319
<v Speaker 1>a link to the homepage for it, which has a

0:37:10.320 --> 0:37:15.520
<v Speaker 1>wonderful timeline for the hypothesis as well listing out various

0:37:15.760 --> 0:37:20.719
<v Speaker 1>historical UH moments and UH technological achievements that line up

0:37:20.880 --> 0:37:23.920
<v Speaker 1>with his hypothesis. And while you're at stuff to Blow

0:37:23.960 --> 0:37:25.279
<v Speaker 1>your Mind dot com, you can check out all the

0:37:25.320 --> 0:37:27.400
<v Speaker 1>episodes of the podcast. You can check out links to

0:37:27.440 --> 0:37:31.360
<v Speaker 1>our various social media accounts and UH. As I've been saying,

0:37:31.520 --> 0:37:34.040
<v Speaker 1>if you want to support this podcast, a great way

0:37:34.080 --> 0:37:36.640
<v Speaker 1>to do it is to rate and review wherever you

0:37:36.680 --> 0:37:39.399
<v Speaker 1>get your podcasts. Big thank you as always to our

0:37:39.400 --> 0:37:42.719
<v Speaker 1>wonderful audio producers Alex Williams and Tarry Harrison. If you

0:37:42.719 --> 0:37:44.560
<v Speaker 1>would like to get in touch with us directly to

0:37:44.640 --> 0:37:46.839
<v Speaker 1>let us know feedback on this episode or any other

0:37:47.200 --> 0:37:49.960
<v Speaker 1>suggest a topic for the future, UH, to share your

0:37:50.000 --> 0:37:52.080
<v Speaker 1>thoughts with us on anything you think we might be

0:37:52.120 --> 0:37:54.520
<v Speaker 1>interested in, or just to say hi, you can always

0:37:54.560 --> 0:37:57.200
<v Speaker 1>email us at blow the Mind at how stuff Works

0:37:57.320 --> 0:38:09.240
<v Speaker 1>dot com. For more on this and thousands of other topics,

0:38:09.360 --> 0:38:22.800
<v Speaker 1>does it, How stuff works? Dot Com, The biffer Ma