The popÂuÂlar sciÂence magÂaÂzine, SciÂenÂtifÂic AmerÂiÂcan, has been around a long time, since 1845 in fact. That makes it the oldÂest periÂodÂiÂcal in conÂtinÂuÂous pubÂliÂcaÂtion in the UnitÂed States. Now, the magÂaÂzine that your great-great-great grandÂfaÂther read has launched a new webÂsite called 60 SecÂond SciÂence. Based on SciÂenÂtifÂic AmerÂiÂcan’s daiÂly podÂcast that’s also called 60 SecÂond SciÂence (iTunes — Feed — Web Site), the new site gets updatÂed 12 times a day, and it feaÂtures its own audio/video podÂcasts, links to key SciÂAm artiÂcles and othÂer good stuff. Have a look, and don’t forÂget to check out our broadÂer colÂlecÂtion of SciÂence PodÂcasts.
201 Stories by Anton Chekhov
Among RusÂsiÂa’s greatÂest writÂers, Anton Chekhov revÂoÂluÂtionÂized RussÂian draÂma and short-stoÂry writÂing. In this colÂlecÂtion, you’ll find 201 transÂlatÂed stoÂries preÂsentÂed in the order of their pubÂliÂcaÂtion. If you’re new to Chekhov, it’s recÂomÂmendÂed by the web site that you begin (and I’m quotÂing verÂbaÂtim) “with a few humorÂous stoÂries, such as Oh! the PubÂlic!, The OraÂtor, and A TransÂgresÂsion. Next try one of Chekhov’s most movÂing stoÂries, MisÂery. Among the longer stoÂries, I sugÂgest beginÂning with Ward No. 6, The Duel, and The Steppe, which conÂtains the most famous thunÂderÂstorm in litÂerÂaÂture. FinalÂly, be sure to read the famous trilÂoÂgy made of The Man in a Case, GooseÂberÂries, and About Love.” (Source: MetafilÂter)
Get free audioÂbook of ficÂtion and non-ficÂtion clasÂsics. VisÂit our AudioÂBook PodÂcast ColÂlecÂtion.
Human Species May Split into Two: Life Imitates Art Again?
Here’s a zinger to mull over: The BBC has postÂed an artiÂcle about a theÂoÂry advanced by OlivÂer CurÂry, an “evoÂluÂtionÂary theÂoÂrist” workÂing out of The LonÂdon School of EcoÂnomÂics, who sugÂgests that humanÂiÂty may split into two sub-species about 100,000 years down the road. And what we’d be left with is “a genetÂic upper class” rulÂing over “a dim-witÂted underÂclass.” This is a sceÂnario, of course, that HG Wells laid out in his 1895 clasÂsic, The Time Machine (lisÂten to free audioÂbook on iTunes here). And, if CurÂry’s theÂoÂry holds water, Welles may offer the most extreme examÂple of sciÂence ficÂtion anticÂiÂpatÂing the shape of the future. Does CurÂry’s theÂoÂry have anyÂthing to it? We haven’t the fogÂgiÂest. But does it make for strangeÂly comÂpelling yet disÂturbÂing readÂing? It sure does.
See our SciÂence PodÂcast ColÂlecÂtion as well as our colÂlecÂtion of AudioÂbook PodÂcasts.
Science for The Rest of Us: Podcasts At a Glance
Today, ElizÂaÂbeth Green MusÂselÂman has penned a guest blog post that you’re bound to enjoy. ElizÂaÂbeth is a proÂfesÂsor and hisÂtoÂriÂan who works on the hisÂtoÂry of sciÂence, and she has recentÂly launched a thoughtÂful podÂcast on the hisÂtoÂry of sciÂence, medÂiÂcine, and techÂnolÂoÂgy. It’s called “The MissÂing Link” (iTunes — Feed — Web Site). Below, she highÂlights for us a range of podÂcasts that will appeal to everyÂday sciÂence enthuÂsiÂasts. (If you’re interÂestÂed in doing some guest blogÂging, drop us a line.) Thanks ElizÂaÂbeth and take it away:
These can seem like dark days for those peoÂple who love sciÂence but who neiÂther speÂcialÂize in the field nor can quite stomÂach the gee-whiz facÂtor that plagues so much popÂuÂlar sciÂence writÂing and broadÂcastÂing. Now that Stephen Jay Gould is cavortÂing someÂwhere in the Beyond with Charles DarÂwin, and ever since the New York AcadÂeÂmy of SciÂences put the ax to its inspired magÂaÂzine The SciÂences, where is a levÂelÂheadÂed lover of the sciÂences to turn?
The podÂcast world has begun to develÂop a niche marÂket for just such lisÂtenÂers, that is, lisÂtenÂers who like their sciÂence relÂaÂtiveÂly non-techÂniÂcal but still high-mindÂed – lisÂtenÂers who think of sciÂence as a part of human culÂture, rather than an arcane temÂple. Not surÂprisÂingÂly, some of the best conÂtent comes from radio proÂgrams that have been re-released as podÂcasts. These include WNYC’s RadiÂoÂLab, an hour-long show whose seriÂous invesÂtiÂgaÂtions on a theme (such as sleep or morÂtalÂiÂty) take on an intriguÂingÂly funÂhouse qualÂiÂty through the program’s invenÂtive use of sound and the humorÂous interÂacÂtion between co-hosts Jad AbumÂrad and Robert KrulÂwich. NPR has also released Krulwich’s solo reports in podÂcast form as Hmmm… KrulÂwich on SciÂence.
AnothÂer longÂstandÂing NPR favorite, The Engines of Our IngeÂnuÂity, began broadÂcastÂing brief, thoughtÂful reflecÂtions on techÂnolÂoÂgy and culÂture in 1988. WritÂten and hostÂed by John LienÂhard, a retired proÂfesÂsor of mechanÂiÂcal engiÂneerÂing and hisÂtoÂry at the UniÂverÂsiÂty of HousÂton, the show now airs five days a week on 30 NPR affilÂiÂates in the U.S. The brief proÂgrams are also availÂable in podÂcast form.
On the othÂer side of the pond, the BBC 4’s long-runÂning, popÂuÂlar show, In Our Time, freÂquentÂly conÂsidÂers sciÂenÂtifÂic topÂics and can also be heard in podÂcast form. Most recentÂly, the proÂgram explored antiÂmatÂter. On each hour-long proÂgram the host, Melvyn Bragg, keeps a panÂel of three scholÂars movÂing at a pace that skirts neatÂly between brisk and conÂtemÂplaÂtive.
FinalÂly, sevÂerÂal podÂcasts proÂduced by indiÂvidÂuÂals have begun to appear, each of which conÂsidÂers sciÂence in conÂtext. ExplorÂing EnviÂronÂmenÂtal HisÂtoÂry feaÂtures Jan Oosthoek’s smart interÂviews with his felÂlow enviÂronÂmenÂtal hisÂtoÂriÂans and sciÂenÂtists, often focusÂing on how hisÂtorÂiÂcal study can point us toward stronger enviÂronÂmenÂtal polÂiÂcy soluÂtions. The most recent episode conÂsidÂers ArcÂtic cliÂmate conÂdiÂtions both today and in the LitÂtle Ice Age. My own monthÂly podÂcast, The MissÂing Link, conÂsidÂers those fasÂciÂnatÂing moments in the hisÂtoÂry of sciÂence, medÂiÂcine, and techÂnolÂoÂgy, when our intelÂlecÂtuÂal and techÂniÂcal prowess rubs up against our very human dreams and failÂings. The most recent episode visÂits Berlin, GerÂmany, where the grueÂsomeÂness of a patholÂoÂgy museum’s colÂlecÂtion masks a cenÂturies-long hisÂtoÂry of both inequitable medÂical care and brilÂliant microÂbiÂoÂlogÂiÂcal research. The proÂgram also disÂcussÂes the Berlin PhonoÂgram Archive, one of the first attempts to record the world’s music for posÂterÂiÂty, designed origÂiÂnalÂly to demonÂstrate the evoÂluÂtionÂary scale of primÂiÂtive to civÂiÂlized humanÂiÂty.
Our Ancestral Mind in the Modern World: An Interview with Satoshi Kanazawa
Human behavÂior is notoÂriÂousÂly comÂplex, and there’s been no shortÂage of psyÂcholÂoÂgists and psyÂchoÂlogÂiÂcal theÂoÂries venÂturÂing to explain what makes us tick. Why do we get irraÂtionalÂly jealÂous? Or have midlife crises? Why do we overeat to our own detriÂment? Why do we find ourÂselves often strongÂly attractÂed to cerÂtain physÂiÂcal traits? NumerÂous theÂoÂries abound, but few are perÂhaps as novÂel and thought-proÂvokÂing as those sugÂgestÂed by a new book with a long title: Why BeauÂtiÂful PeoÂple Have More DaughÂters: From DatÂing, ShopÂping, and PrayÂing to Going to War and BecomÂing a BilÂlionÂaire — Two EvoÂluÂtionÂary PsyÂcholÂoÂgists Explain Why We Do What We Do. WritÂten by Satoshi KanazaÂwa and Alan S. Miller, the book finds answers not in ids, egos and superÂegos, but in the evoÂluÂtion of the human brain. WritÂten in snapÂpy prose, their arguÂment is essenÂtialÂly that our behavÂior — our wants, desires and impulsÂes — are overÂwhelmÂingÂly shaped by the way our brain evolved 10,000+ years ago, and one conÂseÂquence is that our ancesÂtral brain is often respondÂing to a world long ago disÂapÂpeared, not the modÂern, fast-changÂing world in which we live. This disÂconÂnect can lead us to be out of sync, to act in ways that seem inexÂplicÂaÂble or counter-proÂducÂtive, even to ourÂselves. These arguÂments belong to new field called “evoÂluÂtionÂary psyÂcholÂoÂgy,” and we were forÂtuÂnate to interÂview Satoshi KanazaÂwa (LonÂdon School of EcoÂnomÂics) and delve furÂther into evoÂluÂtionÂary psyÂcholÂoÂgy and the (someÂtimes dispirÂitÂing) issues it raisÂes. Have a read, check out the book, and also see the relatÂed piece that the FreakoÂnomÂics folks recentÂly did on this book. Please note that the full interÂview conÂtinÂues after the jump.
DC: In a nutÂshell, what is “evoÂluÂtionÂary psyÂcholÂoÂgy”? (e.g. when did the field emerge? what are the basic tenets/principles of this school of thinkÂing?)
SK: EvoÂluÂtionÂary psyÂcholÂoÂgy is the appliÂcaÂtion of evoÂluÂtionÂary biolÂoÂgy to human cogÂniÂtion and behavÂior. For more than a cenÂtuÂry, zoolÂoÂgists have sucÂcessÂfulÂly used the uniÂfyÂing prinÂciÂples of evoÂluÂtion to explain the body and behavÂior of all aniÂmal species in nature, except for humans. SciÂenÂtists held a speÂcial place for humans and made an excepÂtion for them.
In 1992, a group of psyÂcholÂoÂgists and anthroÂpolÂoÂgists simÂply asked, “Why not? Why can’t we use the prinÂciÂples of evoÂluÂtion to explain human behavÂior as well?” And the new sciÂence of evoÂluÂtionÂary psyÂcholÂoÂgy was born. It is premised on two grand genÂerÂalÂizaÂtions. First, all the laws of evoÂluÂtion by natÂurÂal and sexÂuÂal selecÂtion hold for humans as much as they do for all species in nature. SecÂond, the conÂtents of the human brain have been shaped by the forces of evoÂluÂtion just as much as every othÂer part of human body. In othÂer words, humans are aniÂmals, and as such they have been shaped by evoÂluÂtionÂary forces just as othÂer aniÂmals have been.
DC: EvoÂluÂtionÂary psyÂcholÂoÂgy porÂtrays us as havÂing impulsÂes that took form long ago, in a very pre-modÂern conÂtext (say, 10,000 years ago), and now these impulsÂes are someÂtimes rather ill-adaptÂed to our conÂtemÂpoÂrary world. For examÂple, in a food-scarce enviÂronÂment, we became proÂgrammed to eat whenÂevÂer we can; now, with food aboundÂing in many parts of the world, this impulse creÂates the conÂdiÂtions for an obeÂsiÂty epiÂdemÂic. GivÂen that our world will likeÂly conÂtinÂue changÂing at a rapid pace, are we doomed to have our impulsÂes conÂstantÂly playÂing catch up with our enviÂronÂment, and does that potenÂtialÂly doom us as a species?
SK: In fact, we’re not playÂing catch up; we’re stuck. For any evoÂluÂtionÂary change to take place, the enviÂronÂment has to remain more or less conÂstant for many genÂerÂaÂtions, so that evoÂluÂtion can select the traits that are adapÂtive and elimÂiÂnate those that are not. When the enviÂronÂment underÂgoes rapid change withÂin the space of a genÂerÂaÂtion or two, as it has been for the last couÂple of milÂlenÂnia, if not more, then evoÂluÂtion can’t hapÂpen because nature can’t deterÂmine which traits to select and which to elimÂiÂnate. So they remain at a standÂstill. Our brain (and the rest of our body) are essenÂtialÂly frozen in time — stuck in the Stone Age.
One examÂple of this is that when we watch a scary movie, we get scared, and when we watch porn we get turned on. We cry when someÂone dies in a movie. Our brain canÂnot tell the difÂferÂence between what’s simÂuÂlatÂed and what’s real, because this disÂtincÂtion didn’t exist in the Stone Age.
DC: One conÂcluÂsion from your book is that we’re someÂthing of a prisÂonÂer to our hard-wiring. Yes, there is some room for us to maneuÂver. But, in the end, our evolved nature takes over. If all of this holds true, is there room in our world for utopiÂan (or even mildÂly optiÂmistic) politÂiÂcal moveÂments that look to refashÂion how humans behave and interÂact with one anothÂer? Or does this sciÂence sugÂgest that Edmund Burke was on to someÂthing?
SK: Steven Pinker, in his 2002 book The Blank Slate, makes a very conÂvincÂing arguÂment that all UtopiÂan visions, whether they be motiÂvatÂed by left-wing ideÂolÂoÂgy or right-wing ideÂolÂoÂgy, are doomed to failÂure, because they all assume that human nature is malÂleable. EvoÂluÂtionÂary psyÂcholÂoÂgists have disÂcovÂered that the human mind is not a blank slate, a tabÂuÂla rasa; humans have innate bioÂlogÂiÂcal nature as much as any othÂer species does, and it is not malÂleable. Paul H. Rubin’s 2002 book DarÂwinÂian PolÂiÂtics: The EvoÂluÂtionÂary OriÂgin of FreeÂdom gives an evoÂluÂtionÂary psyÂchoÂlogÂiÂcal account of why Burke and clasÂsiÂcal libÂerÂals (who are today called libÂerÂtarÂiÂans) may have been right.
As a sciÂenÂtist, I am not interÂestÂed in UtopiÂan visions (or any othÂer visions for sociÂety). But it seems to me that, if you want to change the world sucÂcessÂfulÂly, you canÂnot start from false premisÂes. Any such attempt is bound to fail. If you build a house on top of a lake on the assumpÂtion that water is solÂid, it will inevitably colÂlapse and sink to the botÂtom of the lake, but if you recÂogÂnize the fluÂid nature of water, you can build a sucÂcessÂful houseÂboat. A houseÂboat may not be as good as a genÂuine house built on ground, but it’s betÂter than a colÂlapsed house on the botÂtom of the lake. A vision for sociÂety based on an evoÂluÂtionÂary psyÂchoÂlogÂiÂcal underÂstandÂing of human nature at least has a fightÂing chance, which is a much betÂter than any UtopiÂan vision based on the assumpÂtion that human nature is infiÂniteÂly malÂleable.
One Formula Thinking
SpeakÂing of Einstein–have you ever wantÂed to explain the world on a napÂkin? The Edge, self-described as “an online colÂlecÂtive of deep thinkers,” has teamed up with the SerÂpenÂtine Gallery in LonÂdon to parÂticÂiÂpate in a month-long ExperÂiÂment Marathon. The SerÂpenÂtine has been askÂing leadÂing sciÂenÂtists and thinkers “What Is Your ForÂmuÂla?” and the Edge is now hostÂing the fasÂciÂnatÂing answers on their site. Rickard Dawkins, BriÂan Eno and Benoit ManÂdelÂbrot are just a few of the conÂtribÂuÂtors.
Einstein and the Mind of God
SpeakÂing at a conÂferÂence on sciÂence, reliÂgion and phiÂlosÂoÂphy in 1941, Albert EinÂstein famousÂly said that “sciÂence withÂout reliÂgion is lame; reliÂgion withÂout sciÂence is blind.” EinÂstein, a GerÂman-born Jew, conÂsidÂered himÂself reliÂgious. But what he meant by reliÂgion was not straightÂforÂward. The first episode of a two-part podÂcast called EinÂstein and the Mind of God (iTunes — MP3 — Web Site) tries to sort out EinÂstein’s reliÂgious senÂsiÂbilÂiÂty and how it squares with his sciÂenÂtifÂic thinkÂing. For EinÂstein, reliÂgion conÂsistÂed of a belief, not in a perÂsonÂal God, but a uniÂverÂsal spirÂit that manÂiÂfests itself in nature. And it was the task of physics to make sense of nature, of God’s uniÂverse. Or, so that is how it’s explained by FreeÂman Dyson, a famed theÂoÂretÂiÂcal physiÂcist who appears on the show. In the secÂond part, the podÂcast turns to look at EinÂstein’s ethics (iTunes — MP3 — Web Site). Although not withÂout perÂsonÂal flaws (he often fell short in his personal/domestic life), EinÂstein had a strong moral sense informed by his JewÂish upbringÂing. He saw sciÂenÂtists havÂing a deep moral obligÂaÂtion to sociÂety; he took strong posiÂtions against war (except when Hitler came along); he opposed racial disÂcrimÂiÂnaÂtion and lamentÂed the plight of African-AmerÂiÂcans well before the civÂil rights moveÂment; and he laudÂed reliÂgious leadÂers’ efforts to use non-vioÂlent action to oppose immoral conÂdiÂtions. Each of these podÂcasts runs around 53 minÂutes in length, and they form part of a largÂer radio/podcast series called SpeakÂing of Faith (iTunes — Feed — Web Site), which is issued by AmerÂiÂcan PubÂlic Media.
RelatÂed ConÂtent:
The World Without Us: Author Interview
EarÂliÂer this week I spoke on the phone with Alan WeisÂman, the author of The World WithÂout Us. (See our iniÂtial piece on his book.) Alan was graÂcious enough to take some time out of his pubÂlicÂiÂty schedÂule to share his thoughts on the book, the world, his writÂing process, and more. What folÂlows is an editÂed tranÂscript of our conÂverÂsaÂtion.
Ed: This book addressÂes what on the surÂface seems to be a pretÂty far-fetched hypoÂthetÂiÂcal: that humanÂiÂty might sudÂdenÂly disÂapÂpear. What drew you to this premise in the first place?
Alan: Well, preÂciseÂly that. Most great enviÂronÂmenÂtal writÂing does not get read by a lot of the peoÂple who ought to be learnÂing about it because the nearÂer-term posÂsiÂbilÂiÂties just seem someÂtimes so frightÂenÂing, or so depressÂing, that nobody realÂly wants to pick up a book to read it.
By strucÂturÂing the book the way that I did, I disÂarm the autoÂmatÂic fear that repels a lot of peoÂple from readÂing about the enviÂronÂment. PeoÂple don’t want to read someÂthing that seems too threatÂenÂing. On a subÂconÂscious or even a conÂscious levÂel, they don’t want to be worÂried we’re all going to die. In my book, killing us off in the first couÂple of pages means peoÂple don’t have to worÂry about dying because we’re already dead, and that’s a relief in a sense. The idea of glimpsÂing the future is irreÂsistible to all of us and I estabÂlish pretÂty quickÂly that is not going to just be me specÂuÂlatÂing, it’s going to be some hard sciÂence writÂing based on a lot of reportÂing, of talkÂing to experts or eyeÂwitÂnessÂes whose guessÂes will be far more interÂestÂing than most peoÂples’.
The fact that it is far-fetched is realÂly useÂful because on the one hand realÂly it’s a remote posÂsiÂbilÂiÂty that we would leave, that we would disÂapÂpear tomorÂrow. So peoÂple don’t go into a panÂic over this book, and it realÂly gives peoÂple enough time to think about these things withÂout panÂickÂing about it. So that’s how this device works, and I think it’s been proven to be very effecÂtive. I’m getÂting a lot more peoÂple to read it than just peoÂple who are hung up on the enviÂronÂment.
Support Us
We're hoping to rely on loyal readers, rather than erratic ads. Please click the Donate button and support Open Culture. You can use Paypal, Venmo, Patreon, even Crypto! We thank you!
Receive our Daily Email
About Us
Open Culture scours the web for the best educational media. We find the free courses and audio books you need, the language lessons & educational videos you want, and plenty of enlightenment in between.
Advertise With Us
