Predation certainly nurtured it, but I think even early multi cell creatures with proto eyes started the path to evolving the brain. The enteric nervous system had already been around a while, and gee I’d like to see that discussed more.
Good point! There was a lot of evolution at very small scales for things like controlling digestion or perhaps sensing environmental threats before the 'arms race' that began about 500 million years ago. Here's a neat diagram that goes into the evolution from microorganisms: www.scientificamerican.com/article/your-brain-evolved-from-bacteria/ And a little more detail from Feldman Barrett: www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/why-did-we-evolve-brains-in-the-first-place
Exactly, and those "primitive" sensory organs were also nurtured bij predation. Early multicellular life needed these organs to escape predators and locate food (predation also applies to heterotrophs eating autotrophs).
Next to predation i think general environment was a big part in developing sensory organs. Even single-celled life has ways to escape environments that contain toxins to them.
I always assumed "lizard brain" was just shorthand or metaphor to refer to an older, more primitive part of the brain. I didn't realize some people were taking it literally and that it had become canon...🤣🤔🤯
There are snake breeders who actually believe this sort of stuff, and use it to excuse giving their animals 0 enrichment or ability to make choices throughout their lives. ''They don't have thoughts, emotions, and can't learn... they run on pure instincts!'' I mean... yeah no kidding your snake will seem brain-dead when it lives in a barren box, unable to do anything ever, and has no brain stimulation in the slightest.
No that metaphor is the myth that is debunked in the video namely that one somehow a lizard's brain is more primitive and two that some older brain that we humans have is from lizards.
Using the definition on people who are on top of us who make their luxurious living on us is a faulty idea, since these ppl are above us, squeezing every drop of life out of us common folks, designing our future; engineering society however bad that is for us. Being able to control this many humans speaks about more intelligence than just flight or fight. Life is beautiful but it's not fair at all. It is cruel sometimes and the world wasn't founded on compassion either.
It is, I think she's just an idiot. I've never heard of someone actually thinking that's physically how it goes in the brain, like before we get to be Kids, as babies we would still have a "Lizard Brain". That's not how anyone thinks, Ma'am.
I don't think they do and I don't think it has. I fervently hope so. Because that take hinders a nice talk about this topic very much. Anyway gotta run, bake in the sun, catch some bugs.
Sea Squirts are born with a brain, they use it to find a nice place to live where they attach themselves, and then they proceed to digest their brain, spine, and eyes because they don't need them anymore. This was something that I always found interesting.
Domestic cats do something similar as they grow into adult cats they will get rid of their excess neurons that are not being used. That is, they are born with more neurons than they will have as adult cats.
Maybe I happened to get exposed to the correct neuroscience, but I always thought of the triune brain as a metaphor to help memorize where basic behavioral and perceptual functioning occurs.
This was a click bait about "Reptile brain". Just don't confuse lizards or dinosaurs with reptiles. All lizards are reptiles, not all reptiles are lizards and dinosaurs aren't any of both. Mammals evolved from reptiles
Im a reptile keeper and enthusiast. Ive got 30 snakes and 5 geckos. Im not gonna pretend theyre on the level of a dog or human. But there is much more going on up there than what is traditionally believed. You don't survive for 100 million years virtually unchanged if you're a big old dummy. And they react differently to different people, They recognize their owner versus a stranger, and learn from past experience. And some of them you looking in their eyes and you can tell that the wheels are turning, that they are figuring things out. Glad to see that this myth of the reptile brain is finally being debunked in the mainstream, It's 150-year-old theory that was invented by a guy who believed humans were not animals, and worked backwards from that conclusion. We need to start giving animals the respect they deserve because viewing them as these beings wholly dependent on instinct is doing us and them a great disservice
That's so interesting! Our crew recently portraited the sperm whale brain, which is the biggest within the animal kingdom. And it's so fascinating to see how this plays a big role not only in genetic evolution but also in cultural evolution, which made them able to outsmart hunters in the past.
Isn’t the “sperm” they were harvesting to make oil in the head, near the brain? I was just listening to a podcast about the Essex, but it was more comedy than science.
If Carl Sagan had learned he was wrong about the triune brain model (or about anything else, really) he likely would have accepted the correction, gratefully, because this is science not religion.
Sagan is the father of the new age scientism religion that pundits like Shill Nye, Neil Degreaser Tyson, and Steven Faking spew out. They will say the science is settled until they are proven wrong and then act like they never said anything definitive. Carl Sagan was a scientist, but he was a performer more than anything
the inclination to patronize & "prove wrong" the very giants upon whose shoulders today's scientists stand has made for a very spoiled laboratory environment! 💚I'd rather be a dragon in Eden or a charioteer than a lab-grown brain talking about itself.
@@CattleyaHicksthe shoulders of what? Pro slavery dummies like jesus who thought the flu was a desert jhin that needed to be exorcized? Religious ppl have been murdering scientists and retarding human progress non stop for thousands of years. We have progressed *IN SPITE OF* religious lunatics.
Quite honestly, I'm even amazed he defended such an absurd theory to begin with, but yes I am sure, he would have corrected himself. But this is a good reminder that, people should stay in their lanes and not stray away to other topics they are not familiar with.
@@herlandercarvalho was he really pushing it super hard or was he like yeah my buddies in that field talked to me about this and it was convincing at the time?
@@trappart9209on any given day, she is the most (or within the top 5) quoted scientists in the world. She's top of her field. People in that spot always get criticism from below.
@@tmtb80 she shut down my open mind with the quib about people not having actual lizard brains. To me that's on par with creationists scoffing evolution because there're still monkeys around, at which time I turn away and let them be. Your comment makes me now think/hope it was a quib. I'll pry open my mind and take in some more of her words.
@@mariusskrupskis2042 Lisa Feldman has 30 years in the field of neuroscience. I believe she is pretty much qualified to imply conclusions, unlike the self-help gurus who insist on the lizard brain theory.
@@mariusskrupskis2042 i'm glad she at least explicitly put it as a philosophical opinion prefaced with "we can't know why". in my opinion it's a bad take though lol, if not just for the reason that humans evolved communally, not solitarily - like, communities of humans were in competition with other communities, not individual humans all in competition with each other, and as such, the important part biologically would be the traits circulating around the community's general gene pool getting passed down, including traits that lead to variance within the community, including members who wouldn't individually reproduce
People don't say "lizard brain" to literally mean the brain of a lizard. They say it to represent the parts of the brain that represent structures and operations that are rudimentary and likely evolved first.
The term "lizard brain" should probably rather be "lizard-like amniote brain", as the split between Archosauriae (crocodiles, dinosaurs, pterosaurs, birds) and Lepidosauriae (lizards, snakes, comodo dragons et.al.) happened much later (around 245 million years ago) than the split between Diapsida (which include all the former groups) and Synapsida, of which mammals are the last surviving group (around 310 million years ago).
Every time you are presented with a challenge, think of it as a choice point. These moments are precious opportunities. Life will get more interesting if you evolve along the way. You already know the old tune. Ask yourself if it is time for a new one. Paulo Coehlo said, “Never allow waiting to become a habit. Live your dreams and take risks. Life is happening now.”
Yes, technically we don't have lizard brains because they're not part of our evolutionary tree. But, we had some lizard like ancestors in the form of the Synapsids during the Permian era. I think "lizard brain" is referring to a very early lizard like land animal that is also a common ancestor with mammals. This ancestor would share brain features with only part of our brain which is the "lizard brain".
Still incorrect. The reptile brain and mammal brain are very different. It's like saying a car is a simpler form of an airplane. The bird brain is very different from the mammalian brain, yet some birds are very smart. Of course, birds are technically reptiles. Animals are good at the things they need to be good at and subsequently have the brain they need.
@@realtalk5329That seems to be the joke. In a realm where the earth was mostly covered in water, the species that can navigate such an environment is going to be predominantly amphibian But the point is that as mammals came into being, there would be traces of their genetic being that stem back to amphibious physiology. As in the reproductive system had not developed into the placenta base that mammals are known for
probs to the guys who technically produced the interview. Setting is awesome and the fact the the windows are not clipped - such a satisfaction to watch.
When people say "lizard brain" I dont think they mean literally, I think they are referring to the simple prehistoric part of the brain which does all the basic stuff.
What I find fascinating about brains and nervous systems are those of octopi. Yes there is a central brain, but about 2/3rds of its neurons are located in its arms. Which to me means that its neural system is more like a conductor leading an orchestra or perhaps a combination of centrally located sensory and response with semi independent distributed sensory and response apparatus. The accepted hallmarks of intelligence are very much present in octopi (puzzle solving, manipulation of the local environment and so on) that I wonder how their neural system has allowed them to develop these behavioral abilities. The other thing that I find curious about octopi is the combination of radial and lateral symmetry. Another item that I am curious about with octopi are the suckers on their tentacles. Surely these must have some purpose other than grasping objects. If they are a sensory organ, what are they sensing? Note: I am trying very hard to avoid the computer analogies as I do not wish to try to explain something by using an analogy of analogy.
So when you say there was an originating predator-prey moment, for a creature that can't think or make choices, was it just a matter of happenstance? It went to eat its "normal" diet, ingested something different by accident, then the circuitry got rewired to seek out the new thing because it was more energy efficient or whatever, and that snowballed into brains forming and gradually becoming more complex over time?
I think it was just random beneficial mutations that were selected for because they helped the animal prey on others and helped that animal avoid becoming prey themselves, and as these mutations built up the animals grew larger and more complex bodies and those bigger bodies needed more co-ordination
@@dinosaurb I don't buy it. How can an unintelligible, unguided, random process result in a thinking brain with consciousness? And then further more, how could you trust your own rationality if it were all the result of "randomness and mutations"?
@@mitchelltj1 I mean, the way you criticize this idea it seems you aren't seeing the whole picture. Billions, maybe even trillions of these creatures over millions of years. Something fascinating is bound to happen. I'm sure there is more to the story, but this is a pretty simplistic explanation that people can understand and digest. No pun intended. LOL.
I don't see how this explanation (very interesting nonetheless) go against the lizard brain theory, that I understand as: "there's a part of our brains dedicated to basic survival and urges". Please correct me if I'm wrong and enlighten me about this
I felt like she was insisting in the the wrongness of the "lizard brain" hypothesis, because "we don't have the brain of a lizard"... well, yeah . The triune brain is supposed to be a model to explain differences in the brain, but just a model. Nobody said that we literally have a lizard brain inside of us.... that's weird.
i think the point here would most favourably be that there isn't one "part" of the brain dedicated to those things, but rather that they're more just traits that are part of the overall brain soup and are not untouched nor separate from our more recently evolved traits. also i've seen some people use "lizard brain" as an excuse to armchair-psychoanalyse subconscious intent in behaviours which have much simpler and more self-evident explanations that don't require imagining the presence of invisible ulterior motives that can't be proven i will say though, at the end, while she gives a reasonable preface about not knowing the reasons i.e. the causes for certain things to evolve and we can only philosophically speculate based on function, i think the conclusion she reaches from that point of "the ultimate job is to pass on your genes" is still a bad take in how weirdly prescriptive it is lol, just not as bad as when people imply that literally every action we take is subconsciously driven by a lizard brain desire to reproduce (anyway i said this in another comment but humans evolved communally, not solitarily, i.e. communities were in competition with other communities, much less so individual humans in competition with each other, so for certain traits to be passed down it would not have been necessary for every individual with those traits to reproduce, but rather their community as a whole do well and continue on, in which there was some chance of having those traits circulating around the general gene pool)
“Lizard brain” is literally just referring to how our brain is hierarchically structured. You have the most basic nervous system which regulates homeostasis, you have slightly higher stuff like motion planning, and then you have things like instincts, drives urges. The “lizard brain” is those last ones. This title is like saying it’s a myth that Spider-Man could make web shoot out of his arms. No one actually thinks we have a lizard brain inside of our actual brain
The whole lizard brain thing is always kinda weird because the implications is that's where all your basic instincts are but lizards definitely react to situation with more than just pure instincts (like lizards can be taught to tolerate handling for example. That's knowledge they gained over time rather than something they had from birth).
The triune brain is only a model people, to help explain the evolution of automatic/survival brain, social/emotional brain and rational/calculating/planning brain. I originally heard automatic/survival brain called dinosaur brain. Just a neat idea that everyone understands
Yeah listening to her debunking this she doesn’t explain well the counter model.. it makes evolutionary sense to have a part of the brain that operates the autonomic nerves first and then further evolving emotions that drive more action and further evolving emotions that drive rational thought to survive in the world .. i don’t understand the point of this video honestly.. there’s no new insight here.. just a neuroscientist telling me the old model is wrong
The myth, supposedly, is that each system evolved independentntly and in order from lower to higher on the brain stem. I am not sure if MacLean actually thought that to be the case., but even so, there are people influenced by MacLean who do not view it in those terms. But the video seems to want to throw out the idea that these structures are homologous in some degree is a bit too much. it is like saying that dog legs and lizard legs are not at all similar.
That was refreshing. She sounds like a verifiable scientist. In Buddhism, we practice letting go to all ego attachments which can be, "I have the answers!" We practice awareness and accept that all of reality is a projection from the mind.
@@freedombro read “The Master and His Emissary” and then any Oliver Sachs. The way we experience reality and actual reality are two very different things. Yes things are both tangible and real. And no, that doesn’t mean we experience them as some kind of objective reality. I use this metaphor a lot to explain perception. Two guys in the woods. One is a park ranger, the other guy is a first timer in the wilderness. It’s the exact same stimuli for both men, with two dramatically different responses, even physiologically. The ranger knows to be cautious, and avoids the bear with experience. The other guy might have a complete adrenaline dump and freeze or run. The way we experience tangible reality is often in a manner very different from our fellow humans.
@@markhathaway9456 oh absolutely. It’s one of those things where we must rely heavily on science for the facts. Science is our objectivity, and it too is flawed. The way the news reports unconfirmed studies trouble me. To even come close to scientific objectivity we must have multiple confirmations on the results of studies, whenever possible. Without at least one confirmation, how can we regard unrepeated results as fact?
Huh? Mammals and reptiles evolved from land dwelling basal amniotes, not fish! We needed to lay eggs on land, this ability didn’t evolve separately in the mammalian and reptile lines, it evolved once. these amniotes were already quite different from fish and basically reptiles. We of course have fish ancestors but also reptile ancestors.
Lizards can be quite intelligent. Tegus and Savanah monitors are two of several large lizards that make wonderful, if high-maintenance, pets. They can bond with their owners and can even play with toys. Some lizards are more social creatures than once thought possible. Some pair bond, some live in burrows with extended family members. Reptiles deserve more respect than we give them.
My experience was more with salvator monitors and heloderma, but consistent with your statement. They seek out the company of the humans in their lives.
yeah, Exothermic animals are more efficient in their internal metabolic processes, this does not mean that they are more intelligent, high top-tier predator or prey, or complex than endothermic animals. maybe a question, if metabolic efficiency is the fundamental biological rate that governs most observed patterns in ecology, then what happen with reptile ? how does the contrary happen with human(endothermic organisms)? is the fundamental biological rate, are not really connected with the complexity of brain?
I've seen so many video that claim to debunk the triune brain theory and then don't. It doesn't matter to me if it's true or false, I'm ready to follow the evidence, but they don't explain what is wrong.
Did anyone ever think we actually have a brain from a lizard built it?! 😂 ... I think the idea was that the functions of the brain are layered from basic/ vital/ automatic to advanced higher functions that we vontrol at will.
Carl Sagan never said that we have "lizard brains". In fact, modern reptiles and mammals both evolved from reptilian like animals (Reptiliomorpha and Amniota), back in the late carboniferous períod, 318 million years ago. Moreover, evolution has showed to the extent of exhaustion, that novel structures have to evolve by coopting preexisting ones. It's one of the basic principles underlying embryology and development.
Well. We have to remember that the scientists are only speculating a theory that the brain developed because one animal intentionally ate another. The reason they came to that conclusion could be explained by the fact that the scientists were possibly biased due to their own primitive action of eating the flesh of other animals. This is a dangerous theory and as a vegan I oppose it. We need to continue evolving as a species and to do that we all need to go vegan. That is what I believe.🌱
I love the way people within collective illusions cant see out of them, for billions of years the instinct brain (run program and fight or flight) was the prime focus, otherwise known as the Thalamus= insects Then for billions of years the focus was Bird/lizard electro magnetic (attachment and emotional range(meaning deciding when to fight or flight)) otherwise known as the Amygdala Then for billions of years the focus was on the Cortices Its that simple but , she is trapped within a confirmation bias bubble that elevates the importance of the cortices in awareness The order to evolve comes from the base of all things and therefore to say we are not on the same branch is literally "cant see the wood for the trees"
Thank you SO MUCH for this! As a neuroscientist, it annoys me no end every time someone repeats that old nonsense about lizard brains, "emotion centers" (the limbic system) etc. Another idiotic version of this myth is the "Polyvagal Theory". The brain is just too complex for these oversimplifications to work, that's why scientists can spend a lifetime trying to understand one tiny part of it. There will be no theory that explains the whole brain, deal with it.
I get what you are saying but doesn’t make evolutionary sense that the base part of the brain evolved first and was more autonomic which drove evolution of the lymbic part of the brain which allowed emotions to drive actions to survive.. eventually leading to emotions to drive abstract thinking in the prefrontal cortex and to plan for possible scenarios of the future and better manipulation of the environment?
@@MrPelham32 It could make sense, if brains were so clearly compartmentalized. Yes, there is some modularity, especially with regard to sensory processing, but emotions are not easy to separate from other cognitive processes, especially in the messiness of real life. There are no complex emotions without complex cognition. Even integrating complex sensory input into simple action output still requires some level of pattern recognition which can quickly get abstract. Only if both your sensory input and your action outputs are very simple, can you get away with not having many cognitive capacities, but then you also don't need any emotional complexity.
This absolutely doesn't mean thought processing doesn't function in layers of priority. It just means it isn't physically layered (i.e. is not in layers made of DNA of different "tenure"). It is equivalently the same in output as in the physically layered model.
Semantic strawman. Yes, people say "lizard brain", but we know that they're not literally referring to lizards, they're referring to the reptile ancestors of mammals. We can even see this in the newspaper clipping shown at about 2:15 in, that say "reptiles" and not "lizards". Also, reptiles and mammals did not evolve from fish. Mammals evolved from reptiles, reptiles evolved from amphibians, and amphibians evolved from bony fishes. So, she uses a misleading strawman, and gets the basics of The evolutionary tree wrong, so how am I supposed to trust anything else she says?
I like brain stuff, so I just bought her book on audible, will be interested to hear it. The flip side is that I'm wondering if the "debunking" critique here is substantive, in that it seems to rest on the point that modern reptiles have structures in their brain that are homologous to non-reptile parts of the human brain. However, if they're homologous but also not comparable in terms of function while the so-called "lizard brain" is similar between humans and reptiles, then one could still defend the use of the term "lizard brain."
i recently started reading a book called the courage to be disliked which talks about teleology and trauma, and it’s a fascinating link to our purpose and goal. we’re capable of continuously evolving as this video shows. and i think a huge stage in that human evolution is emotional intelligence and self awareness. i highly recommend the book to anyone familiar with sigmand freud and even carl jung’s work. because it actually brings to light the work of a third prominent psychologist named alfred adler, who i think hasn’t been recognized as much. his work holds the key to how we can take charge of our own story and grow despite our past traumas and conditionings.
Lizard brain just alludes to the oldest or most primitive part of the brain. As far as I know. I never knew people thought that we had literally lizard’s brains
i've always heard it refered to as a "reptile brain," not a "lizard brain." this is literally the first context i've heard the latter used. that being said, mammals did come from reptiles, so the metaphor is still apt.
That is if we count early synapsids as being actual reptiles. Personally I doubt it since they were all far closer to us genetically than to any modern animal we classify as a 'reptiles'. Birds evolved from reptiles, that is very clear, but I'm not that sure about mammals doing the same.
Its still not apt become reptiles are not simple instinct machines from which mammals then humans progressed. Lizards and other reptiles have evolved well past that initial reptilian ancestor and their brains are closer to that of birds than mammals. None of these animals lack the structures for higher level thought. Humans are unique in terms of our intelligence in the sense that it is just that much more advanced than any animal-but reptiles, birds, and mammals all have structures (albeit different ones) for intelligent higher level thought.
I always thought the “lizard brain” was the limbic system because reptiles have instincts and base emotions (at least fear, aggression, attraction) but not higher thought. So when you’re acting on instinct or base feelings, your “lizard brain” is driving your behavior more predominantly than your cerebral cortex
She is a beast and ahead of her time. If you read her, most psychological theories become obsolete. The brain is definitely a predictive entity, learning that changed the way I look at the world. Keep it up. 😊
The brain myth was immortalized in Star Trek, where Spock was rational, Bones was emotional, and Scotty was the cerebellum, which were all directed by Kirk.
That's not referring to the brain. That's referring to the tripartite mind. And Scotty wasn't involved It's, Id -Bones, Ego - Spock, and Superego - Kirk
"Explain it like Im smart" video is full of simple cartoons and is 7:14 long. It should be entitled "Make me feel like Im smart even though I'm too intellectually lazy to read a textbook or watch one of the multi hour university lectures on RUclips."
@@thedanielfuentes that's kinda true, I guess. mimetics state something similar, I believe. It's not the best ideas that get past on, but the most replicable.
I don't feel compelled to pass my jeans along. I use them, patch and repair as needed, then trash them. Our leading neuroscientist needs smaller scarves that don't look like neck braces. And I never really know with her if I'm learning something or unlearning something.
I always connected the "lizard brain" to the area of the brain that controls our emotions, hence why we are driven to action through our emotions. Also known as the amygdala. So many of us live our lives under control of the amygdala instinct, unaware of how our emotions govern our actions, when in reality it should be the other way around. Our actions, or our mind controlling our emotions. To be aware of this is to realize that at any giving moment, our bodies respond to our environment in a very "animal" way, prompting our brains to think equal to our environment. This part of our brain hasnt evolved because we have all stayed stuck in enjoying the benefits of fight and flight adrenaline response that we all live with on a daily basis now. If we can learn to rewire our thought process eventually over time, we wont need to be so wired all the time, and quite possibly unlock different mental capacities that have been burried deep inside our brains. Could it be that we use a very limited capacity of our brain power for this reason? Until we learn to let go of anamocity, we will never evolve into something more.
yeah, we always seek an explanation for something bad that cause something what we don't want(essensially something that torture us) . how will it be, if we just accept everything, and tolerating it?
While the concept may be scientifically inaccurate, the metaphor has utility in the field of psychotherapy. By describing emotional and physical dysregulation as originating from an older part of the brain the experience of dysregulation may be normalized and put in context rather than judged or shamed. Escalation and agitation are normal parts of brain function, and with the application of a few simple skills we can learn to give our rational brain time to engage and improve outcomes in relationships and interactions. My staff actively and deliberately teach clients that they have a lizard brain, it's important, it's o.k. to have one, and when we keep our "evolved brain" in the drivers seat we become more effective agents in a host of situations. We get good results with this approach.
yeah, we always seek an explanation for something bad that cause something what we don't want(essensially something that torture us) . how will it be, if we just accept everything, and tolerating it?
Actually I think it's harmful to therapy, because it's based on a consequential misconception: it labels (strong) emotions as primitive and negative, and rational thought as superior, when actually the whole brain has evolved, including the "primitive" "old" parts of the brain. It has been shown that when people entirely lose emotions they make *worse* decisions. A lot of problems cannot be solved purely logically. All parts of the brain have a function, instead of controlling "primitive" parts of the brain, and letting the "rational" part take over and dominate the rest, we should broaden our focus and listen to more voices in our brain. The issue is tunnel vision, not the emotions we feel. Another rational form of tunnel vision is not better, it's equally limited.
It's actually a harmful fallacy to keep teaching that in therapy: all parts of your brain have a useful function, numbing some out / controlling them will not make you see clearer. What you want to do is broaden your tunnel vision, not replace it with "rational" kind of tunnel vision. The shame and judgement of (strong) emotional responses comes from ignorance and a morale view that is simplistic. Alleviating that shame with another misunderstanding is not helpful. It has been shown that many problems cannot be decided purely logically, and that people with no emotions will get stuck. Tunnel vision is what creates issues, replacing it with a "rational" kind of tunnel view is not improving things, it's limiting you in other ways.
Having sat in community mental health classes telling me we have Lizard brains I am so glad to hear someone challenging this ie we don't have lizard brains because we aren't evolved from lizards! Good grief! I can now refer people to this video.
We absolutely evolved from creatures anyone today would call lizards if they saw them IRL. And you seem to have miss the point. This video did nothing to address the concepts that this "story" teaches. It does NOT say the brain stem isn't responsible for basic metabolic functions, the limbic isn't isn't primarily responsible for emotions. The conclusion it makes about the about the development time of the cerebral cortex is gibberish. We don't really end up with a bigger cerebral cortex it just looks that way because it develops for longer into a bigger thing?
@@donaldbest1154 yeah I didn't understand the point of that last bit... like what does it mean it "looks like" we have bigger prefrontal cortexes compared to the rest of our brains? Does that mean it's an optical illusion or something?
There may be an important difference between the parts of neural systems that have pre-programmed less-changeable pathways created by ancestral DNA, and the neural systems that can change and store memory...possibly related to differences in synapse chemistry. Knowing how this works might help to improve human behavior and learning.
Um, pretty sure "lizard brain" is a metaphor for the fight/flight survival instinct inherent in lizards, but it's not meant literally. And this is "Big Thinking"? o,O Um...
No, no: the terms was used because it was initially supposed that the structure was shared with that of lizards indicating a common evolutionary origin. Nowadays, the term can be used to indicate a “simple and instinctual way of thinking”, but the majority of people (in the academic field too, unfortunately) think that the meaning is still literal
Well, I would say: Metaphors are never _exact_ of course, otherwise they wouldn't be metaphors after all, right? But, if we analyse metaphors just for their quality of more accurately and ingeniously representing reality seen from a specific domain (such as the scientific domain in general), it should be possible to evaluate if a metaphor is _better_ or _worse_ , for the interests of such particular context. This certainly doesn't mean we should discard metaphors at all, but we should always try to develop better, more insightful ones, according to the context.
I’m pretty disappointed by this video, but I guess this is just a case of language evolving. “Lizard brain” has become a more casual term compared to its old definition. Most of us are familiar with the new definition and didn’t know the history behind it. So… I feel misled by the title, even if it is accurate. Actually, now I’m wondering if we’re the right audience for the actual explanation in the video.
OK sure...but when we lay people say lizard brain we don't mean we literally have a lizard's brain, we mean our primordial brain we inherited from our ancient non-human ancestors...maybe that's incorrect, too...but that's what we mean. 🥴
That's literally they idea they're debunking. you didnt inherit a primordial brain from non human ancestors, as that implies they themselves inherited a primordial brain from their ancestors, and so on and so on until oh, we all inherited part of our brain from lizards. no. each organism has a brain that wired and rewired through every single generation a new thing, wired for that organism, and no part of it, no section is a primordial part. every generation, every organism has a brain that is wired for that organism, and not some other organism, not a lizard, not a primordial ancestor, not a fish, just that organism.
The idea that "an animal to suddenly hunt and that's why brains evolved" passes the explanatory buck by taking for granted that such a first decisive animal wouldn't have needed a brain to make the decision.. not a good basis for explaining emergence. Terrance Deacon offers an empirically testable model for the emergence of mind.
well, plato talked about the soul, and he didn't talk about instinct and emotion. he said similar things, but this way of putting it is identical to the medievals which tended to picture the romans as medieval in clothing, architecture and habit.
Gosh, I hope this video blows up. The pervasive use of the triune brain myth in the modern day is really frustrating. We absolutely need to, as a society, do away with the notion that logic and emotion are in contention with one another in the brain and the triune brain myth's long running history is the main contributor to that false idea.
How exactly would you tackle helping someone with an anger based impulse control issue. Would you tell them their rational and emotional selves were not really in conflict? What would you say to them as they reported watching in horror as they lost control of themselves and did and said things they regretted AS they knew they were about to do them? Myth is not a false story but one that contains truth rather than is true. This myth does not create this inner experience it just seeks to explain it.
@@donaldbest1154 I wouldn't tackle that at all, because I'm not a professional expert. This isn't a question to ask a layperson. What I do know, is that I'm quite confident that professional experts would be operating much more efficiently if they were developing their methodologies based on updated accurate models of the human brain, instead of falling back on outdated models. The fact of the matter is, that all the recent research in neurology and emotion shows that there is no fundamental separation between rationality and emotion. They are intrinsically linked to one another and all actions and behaviors come down stream from our instances of emotion and the concepts that our brains use to run predictions and interpret data. What good is does it do to explain someone's experience using a model of their brain that is completely false?
Not quite. Amygdala hijack is a real phenomenon and is exactly what propaganda purposely triggers so you are more suggestible. They don't call it "propaganda " any more, though. It's advertising or public relations. Watch a few videos on the science behind this and you start to see why so many of us are angry, depressed and anxious with little impulse control. Being in a frequent threat response does not lead you to greater heights of critical thinking, but instead to increased irrationality.
@@donaldbest1154 I would have the intelligence to use a better metephor than one that propagates myth, superstition, religious ideology or other hokum. And I'd avoid relying of argumentation from lack of imagination as some kind of rationality to persist in ignorance.
@@Aaron.Thomas We are clearly concerned about different areas of ignorance. I am not concerned with truth on some ideal level. You can't just say you would replace practical tools you need to actually do it. Or I consider your enlightenment darkness.
Didn’t mammals evolve from synapsids? And synapsids evolve from reptiles? Like correct me if I’m wrong but reptiles and mammals didn’t split off when life first grew legs and walked on land.
Synapsids and reptiles evolved separately from a basal amnoite very soon after the amniote egg evolved. They are sister clades. The reptile (saurapsid) and synapsids lines evolved seperately from a common ancestor.
I feel like this is something that was used as a metaphor for where functions are or what functions are more basic and primordial, but then it was taken literally. As if evolution works by just putting another layer on top.
I don't think this video did anything to refute - whatever it is she thinks she is refuting. Often times scientists cherry pick and only notice what isn't working about a common understanding of a thing and argue against it's flaws without honoring OR replacing the utility of this understanding. This video is guilty of that. Of course - for instance our motor control needed to evolve with our changing bodies. So if people think that simply because our expanded cerebral cortex is where the hominid action mostly was. Its not hard to point out that some parts of tool use required changes deeper down. It doesn't just look like mice have a smaller cerebral cortex they do all that extra time results in a much larger brain to body mass and much larger cerebrals cortex verses the rest.... Her statements seem less accurate than any misconception she is trying to debunk. Genetics debunks the tripart brain because of development times??? We don't have lizard brains because our first amniote ancestors (who meet any lay persons idea of a lizard exactly) weren't technically lizards from a scientists point of view you need to understand jargon like post orbital fenestra's to understand. I say leave science communication to people like Carl Sagan and stop trying to contradict him. When you show your ignorance of common sense you look like a fool legitimately.
@@freedombro Nope. Didn't say that. Dude said she's showing her ignorance, and I can assure you she's not ignorant. Having read her books, many of the papers her lab has published, and watched hours of lectures and interviews about her research, I'm much more confident that to lay the blame on Big Think for poor editing. Especially given that they're a pop sci publication. Lisa Feldman Barrett is doing her best to increase the PR and better the public understanding around neuroscientific concepts that have gone wildly misunderstood for a long time. Emotions being the big one. Triune brain myth has a lot to do with that. So, it makes sense that she'd do a few video segments for Big Think to try and further disseminate her lab's research.
@@rowanaster3986 This has no relevance to the question of this as successful peace of communication to the general public. She probably benefits greatly from the peer review process. Your appeal to authority is not logical response.
There is no teleological cause behind evolution (except perhaps human teleological causes in cases of selective breeding); the questions of “why” could pertain more to evolutionary pressures behind various adaptations/trajectories (at particular points in time), and questions of “how” could pertain more to the mechanisms through which evolution occurs.
For therapeutic purposes, the triune brain serves a metaphorical purpose - and in part, is felt internally as experientially having value to make sense of our lived experience & different motivations. However, in modern CBT, in particular CFT, there is more of a recognition of our various motivations, and uses a metaphor for our drive-threat & soothing systems. Lisa's theory is quite a physically reductionist model? Mere thoughts...
I would argue that it's not a useful metaphorical concept, but what she's pointing out is that the concept of the triune brain is not a metaphor. This is a real neurological model that has existed for 50 years. And it has been the leading model of the human brain for far too long, because it's not accurate. It doesn't even come close to describing how the human brain evolved, how it develops, or how it processes sense data. I don't think it's useful to use metaphorical concepts that draw on a truncated representation of the human brain. I think we are more than capable of coming up with metaphors that map onto modern models of how the human brain functions without sacrificing any efficacy in their application
@@meech3576 I don't even need to, because Big Think released another video last week with the same researcher, Lisa Feldman Barrett, explaining emotions better than I ever could. Don't fall into the trap of believing that every person that identifies the inefficacy of something must also be the one to identify the solution. It's an unreasonable way to approach the concept of problem solving. In fact, I'd recommend you engage with all of LFB's work, as she has a litany of brilliant metaphors for the brain as a modern model.
@@meech3576 additionally, I don't think you give your fellow sapiens enough credit, if you think we need oversimplified metaphors that function on an outdated model to explain this stuff to laypeople. People aren't stupid. They're underinformed
Predation certainly nurtured it, but I think even early multi cell creatures with proto eyes started the path to evolving the brain. The enteric nervous system had already been around a while, and gee I’d like to see that discussed more.
Good point! There was a lot of evolution at very small scales for things like controlling digestion or perhaps sensing environmental threats before the 'arms race' that began about 500 million years ago.
Here's a neat diagram that goes into the evolution from microorganisms: www.scientificamerican.com/article/your-brain-evolved-from-bacteria/
And a little more detail from Feldman Barrett: www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/why-did-we-evolve-brains-in-the-first-place
I ❤ U guys!
@@bigthink thank you very much. Much appreciated!
Exactly, and those "primitive" sensory organs were also nurtured bij predation. Early multicellular life needed these organs to escape predators and locate food (predation also applies to heterotrophs eating autotrophs).
Next to predation i think general environment was a big part in developing sensory organs. Even single-celled life has ways to escape environments that contain toxins to them.
Interesting... I always thought "lizard brain" was just a metaphor for what we would consider our basest, most primal animal urges and instincts.
Big Think gets amazing guests and then gives these ridiculous click bait titles
Same tbh didn't know people meant in a literal sense until now.
What's next? Butterflies not containing butter? What's it called again if one takes everything literal..
Same here
same. never thought it suggested a literal vestigial lizard brain
I always assumed "lizard brain" was just shorthand or metaphor to refer to an older, more primitive part of the brain. I didn't realize some people were taking it literally and that it had become canon...🤣🤔🤯
There are snake breeders who actually believe this sort of stuff, and use it to excuse giving their animals 0 enrichment or ability to make choices throughout their lives. ''They don't have thoughts, emotions, and can't learn... they run on pure instincts!''
I mean... yeah no kidding your snake will seem brain-dead when it lives in a barren box, unable to do anything ever, and has no brain stimulation in the slightest.
No that metaphor is the myth that is debunked in the video namely that one somehow a lizard's brain is more primitive and two that some older brain that we humans have is from lizards.
Using the definition on people who are on top of us who make their luxurious living on us is a faulty idea, since these ppl are above us, squeezing every drop of life out of us common folks, designing our future; engineering society however bad that is for us. Being able to control this many humans speaks about more intelligence than just flight or fight. Life is beautiful but it's not fair at all. It is cruel sometimes and the world wasn't founded on compassion either.
It is, I think she's just an idiot. I've never heard of someone actually thinking that's physically how it goes in the brain, like before we get to be Kids, as babies we would still have a "Lizard Brain". That's not how anyone thinks, Ma'am.
I don't think they do and I don't think it has. I fervently hope so. Because that take hinders a nice talk about this topic very much. Anyway gotta run, bake in the sun, catch some bugs.
Sea Squirts are born with a brain, they use it to find a nice place to live where they attach themselves, and then they proceed to digest their brain, spine, and eyes because they don't need them anymore. This was something that I always found interesting.
That's crazy. Similar to suicide yet they still live.
That's stunning
Ok what??? That is incredible! I need to look that up!
That really much describes the way of life for many people, who get stuck in their social media bubble.
Domestic cats do something similar as they grow into adult cats they will get rid of their excess neurons that are not being used. That is, they are born with more neurons than they will have as adult cats.
Maybe I happened to get exposed to the correct neuroscience, but I always thought of the triune brain as a metaphor to help memorize where basic behavioral and perceptual functioning occurs.
This was a click bait about "Reptile brain". Just don't confuse lizards or dinosaurs with reptiles.
All lizards are reptiles, not all reptiles are lizards and dinosaurs aren't any of both.
Mammals evolved from reptiles
@@hanskrieger4299should be top comment
@@hanskrieger4299 wut? dragonflies aren't dragons?
@@hanskrieger4299
Actually mammals did not evolve from reptiles.
@@hanskrieger4299dinosaurs are reptiles. And so are mammals btw
Im a reptile keeper and enthusiast. Ive got 30 snakes and 5 geckos. Im not gonna pretend theyre on the level of a dog or human. But there is much more going on up there than what is traditionally believed. You don't survive for 100 million years virtually unchanged if you're a big old dummy. And they react differently to different people, They recognize their owner versus a stranger, and learn from past experience. And some of them you looking in their eyes and you can tell that the wheels are turning, that they are figuring things out. Glad to see that this myth of the reptile brain is finally being debunked in the mainstream, It's 150-year-old theory that was invented by a guy who believed humans were not animals, and worked backwards from that conclusion. We need to start giving animals the respect they deserve because viewing them as these beings wholly dependent on instinct is doing us and them a great disservice
Very well said!
😅
what do we do if animal can speak(just really speak(for thought) as toddler would surprising) and then do farm(some animal do simple farm) ?
Lizard brain just means our base instincts.
That's so interesting! Our crew recently portraited the sperm whale brain, which is the biggest within the animal kingdom. And it's so fascinating to see how this plays a big role not only in genetic evolution but also in cultural evolution, which made them able to outsmart hunters in the past.
Isn’t the “sperm” they were harvesting to make oil in the head, near the brain? I was just listening to a podcast about the Essex, but it was more comedy than science.
I would like to hear more about those brainless "stomach on a stick" animals. They sounded fascinating.
Lancelets, of the family amphioxus.
You can find out everything you need to know about Amphiouxus, just go to your nearest trump rally.... They'll be wearing red hats...
I feel called out!
Imagine studying so many brains as a neuroscientist, and getting so tired of it... that your favourite animal has no brain at all
swimming worms basically
"They're just little stomachs on a stick." I took that personally.
What are you a worm?
stomachs on a stick. coming soon to a State Fair near you!
Well, cause Cows are out here solving Math problems, right?
what i learned is that mice shouldn’t be allowed to have a gun until they are 60 days old
If Carl Sagan had learned he was wrong about the triune brain model (or about anything else, really) he likely would have accepted the correction, gratefully, because this is science not religion.
Sagan is the father of the new age scientism religion that pundits like Shill Nye, Neil Degreaser Tyson, and Steven Faking spew out. They will say the science is settled until they are proven wrong and then act like they never said anything definitive. Carl Sagan was a scientist, but he was a performer more than anything
the inclination to patronize & "prove wrong" the very giants upon whose shoulders today's scientists stand has made for a very spoiled laboratory environment! 💚I'd rather be a dragon in Eden or a charioteer than a lab-grown brain talking about itself.
@@CattleyaHicksthe shoulders of what? Pro slavery dummies like jesus who thought the flu was a desert jhin that needed to be exorcized? Religious ppl have been murdering scientists and retarding human progress non stop for thousands of years. We have progressed *IN SPITE OF* religious lunatics.
Quite honestly, I'm even amazed he defended such an absurd theory to begin with, but yes I am sure, he would have corrected himself. But this is a good reminder that, people should stay in their lanes and not stray away to other topics they are not familiar with.
@@herlandercarvalho was he really pushing it super hard or was he like yeah my buddies in that field talked to me about this and it was convincing at the time?
So if I understand this correctly, we don't have lizard brains . . . we have fish brains
😂
Lol, I thought the same.
im pretty sure the take away was we have horse brains right?
No U
You’re doing God’s work. You saved me 7min of my life.
I always thought lizards brain was like a metaphor. Didn't think it was thought to be real.
I've read her book how emotions are made and it was amazing
Same same it was a great book
Read some negative reviews on this book
@@trappart9209on any given day, she is the most (or within the top 5) quoted scientists in the world. She's top of her field. People in that spot always get criticism from below.
@@trappart9209that's always a given...
@@tmtb80 she shut down my open mind with the quib about people not having actual lizard brains. To me that's on par with creationists scoffing evolution because there're still monkeys around, at which time I turn away and let them be. Your comment makes me now think/hope it was a quib. I'll pry open my mind and take in some more of her words.
I’m glad she was honest about what we can and cannot know
tho still she implied her own conclusion at the end.. :D
@@mariusskrupskis2042 Lisa Feldman has 30 years in the field of neuroscience. I believe she is pretty much qualified to imply conclusions, unlike the self-help gurus who insist on the lizard brain theory.
@@mariusskrupskis2042 i'm glad she at least explicitly put it as a philosophical opinion prefaced with "we can't know why". in my opinion it's a bad take though lol, if not just for the reason that humans evolved communally, not solitarily - like, communities of humans were in competition with other communities, not individual humans all in competition with each other, and as such, the important part biologically would be the traits circulating around the community's general gene pool getting passed down, including traits that lead to variance within the community, including members who wouldn't individually reproduce
She can brilliantly explain topics so well!
People don't say "lizard brain" to literally mean the brain of a lizard. They say it to represent the parts of the brain that represent structures and operations that are rudimentary and likely evolved first.
"And so the brain wondered: What was the brain good for?" -brain
The term "lizard brain" should probably rather be "lizard-like amniote brain", as the split between Archosauriae (crocodiles, dinosaurs, pterosaurs, birds) and Lepidosauriae (lizards, snakes, comodo dragons et.al.) happened much later (around 245 million years ago) than the split between Diapsida (which include all the former groups) and Synapsida, of which mammals are the last surviving group (around 310 million years ago).
Just beautiful!
Listening to her, her words; the music was just beautiful, I would sit next to her and listen to her all day.
Every time you are presented with a challenge, think of it as a choice point. These moments are precious opportunities. Life will get more interesting if you evolve along the way. You already know the old tune. Ask yourself if it is time for a new one.
Paulo Coehlo said, “Never allow waiting to become a habit. Live your dreams and take risks. Life is happening now.”
In my country we don't have lizard brain, we have shirmp brain.
Otak udang 😭
Yes, technically we don't have lizard brains because they're not part of our evolutionary tree. But, we had some lizard like ancestors in the form of the Synapsids during the Permian era. I think "lizard brain" is referring to a very early lizard like land animal that is also a common ancestor with mammals. This ancestor would share brain features with only part of our brain which is the "lizard brain".
I agree. Also mammals also evolved from amphibians
I think Aron would be proud of you.
Still incorrect. The reptile brain and mammal brain are very different. It's like saying a car is a simpler form of an airplane. The bird brain is very different from the mammalian brain, yet some birds are very smart. Of course, birds are technically reptiles.
Animals are good at the things they need to be good at and subsequently have the brain they need.
@@grisflyt saying birds are technically reptiles is like saying mammals are technically amphibians
@@realtalk5329That seems to be the joke. In a realm where the earth was mostly covered in water, the species that can navigate such an environment is going to be predominantly amphibian
But the point is that as mammals came into being, there would be traces of their genetic being that stem back to amphibious physiology. As in the reproductive system had not developed into the placenta base that mammals are known for
Feldman barret’s iconoclastic thinking ; gotta love her
probs to the guys who technically produced the interview. Setting is awesome and the fact the the windows are not clipped - such a satisfaction to watch.
When people say "lizard brain" I dont think they mean literally, I think they are referring to the simple prehistoric part of the brain which does all the basic stuff.
Exactly
What I find fascinating about brains and nervous systems are those of octopi. Yes there is a central brain, but about 2/3rds of its neurons are located in its arms. Which to me means that its neural system is more like a conductor leading an orchestra or perhaps a combination of centrally located sensory and response with semi independent distributed sensory and response apparatus. The accepted hallmarks of intelligence are very much present in octopi (puzzle solving, manipulation of the local environment and so on) that I wonder how their neural system has allowed them to develop these behavioral abilities. The other thing that I find curious about octopi is the combination of radial and lateral symmetry. Another item that I am curious about with octopi are the suckers on their tentacles. Surely these must have some purpose other than grasping objects. If they are a sensory organ, what are they sensing? Note: I am trying very hard to avoid the computer analogies as I do not wish to try to explain something by using an analogy of analogy.
So when you say there was an originating predator-prey moment, for a creature that can't think or make choices, was it just a matter of happenstance? It went to eat its "normal" diet, ingested something different by accident, then the circuitry got rewired to seek out the new thing because it was more energy efficient or whatever, and that snowballed into brains forming and gradually becoming more complex over time?
Agreed
I think it was just random beneficial mutations that were selected for because they helped the animal prey on others and helped that animal avoid becoming prey themselves, and as these mutations built up the animals grew larger and more complex bodies and those bigger bodies needed more co-ordination
@@dinosaurb I don't buy it. How can an unintelligible, unguided, random process result in a thinking brain with consciousness? And then further more, how could you trust your own rationality if it were all the result of "randomness and mutations"?
@@mitchelltj1 well, we've just been very lucky, apparently.
@@mitchelltj1 I mean, the way you criticize this idea it seems you aren't seeing the whole picture. Billions, maybe even trillions of these creatures over millions of years. Something fascinating is bound to happen. I'm sure there is more to the story, but this is a pretty simplistic explanation that people can understand and digest. No pun intended. LOL.
Brains watching a brain talking about brains.
I don't see how this explanation (very interesting nonetheless) go against the lizard brain theory, that I understand as: "there's a part of our brains dedicated to basic survival and urges". Please correct me if I'm wrong and enlighten me about this
I felt like she was insisting in the the wrongness of the "lizard brain" hypothesis, because "we don't have the brain of a lizard"... well, yeah . The triune brain is supposed to be a model to explain differences in the brain, but just a model. Nobody said that we literally have a lizard brain inside of us.... that's weird.
That was my feeling as well.
i think the point here would most favourably be that there isn't one "part" of the brain dedicated to those things, but rather that they're more just traits that are part of the overall brain soup and are not untouched nor separate from our more recently evolved traits. also i've seen some people use "lizard brain" as an excuse to armchair-psychoanalyse subconscious intent in behaviours which have much simpler and more self-evident explanations that don't require imagining the presence of invisible ulterior motives that can't be proven
i will say though, at the end, while she gives a reasonable preface about not knowing the reasons i.e. the causes for certain things to evolve and we can only philosophically speculate based on function, i think the conclusion she reaches from that point of "the ultimate job is to pass on your genes" is still a bad take in how weirdly prescriptive it is lol, just not as bad as when people imply that literally every action we take is subconsciously driven by a lizard brain desire to reproduce (anyway i said this in another comment but humans evolved communally, not solitarily, i.e. communities were in competition with other communities, much less so individual humans in competition with each other, so for certain traits to be passed down it would not have been necessary for every individual with those traits to reproduce, but rather their community as a whole do well and continue on, in which there was some chance of having those traits circulating around the general gene pool)
The music is distracting
Tell me you have ADHD without….
Yes.
@@Kris-l3u 😄 spot on
"They may take our lives, but they'll never take... OUR LIZARD BRAINS!!!"
“Lizard brain” is literally just referring to how our brain is hierarchically structured. You have the most basic nervous system which regulates homeostasis, you have slightly higher stuff like motion planning, and then you have things like instincts, drives urges. The “lizard brain” is those last ones. This title is like saying it’s a myth that Spider-Man could make web shoot out of his arms. No one actually thinks we have a lizard brain inside of our actual brain
This Video has a lot of "ACSHUALLY" energy
my mans over here be lookin at memes and goin "um ackchyually"
The whole lizard brain thing is always kinda weird because the implications is that's where all your basic instincts are but lizards definitely react to situation with more than just pure instincts (like lizards can be taught to tolerate handling for example. That's knowledge they gained over time rather than something they had from birth).
I feel like almost all land animal can be trained it's sea creatures tha are rare. I don't know why that is
I watched video on three layers of brain just two days ago and now this pops up-
Yeah me too. The other one is from Robert Sapolsky whom I'm a big fan of
The triune brain is only a model people, to help explain the evolution of automatic/survival brain, social/emotional brain and rational/calculating/planning brain. I originally heard automatic/survival brain called dinosaur brain. Just a neat idea that everyone understands
Yeah listening to her debunking this she doesn’t explain well the counter model.. it makes evolutionary sense to have a part of the brain that operates the autonomic nerves first and then further evolving emotions that drive more action and further evolving emotions that drive rational thought to survive in the world .. i don’t understand the point of this video honestly.. there’s no new insight here.. just a neuroscientist telling me the old model is wrong
@@MrPelham32fully agree. This video brings nothing to the table other than a person "debunking a myth" which wasn't a myth to begin with.
@@LeBionArc Yup i agree she isnt really replacing the old modle with something new, it seems like just semantics to me
The myth, supposedly, is that each system evolved independentntly and in order from lower to higher on the brain stem. I am not sure if MacLean actually thought that to be the case., but even so, there are people influenced by MacLean who do not view it in those terms. But the video seems to want to throw out the idea that these structures are homologous in some degree is a bit too much. it is like saying that dog legs and lizard legs are not at all similar.
It's really strange that she's presenting an argument as if she's taking a metaphor literally.
It's completely ridiculous
Actually, the horses are 5 and are the 5 senses, and the charioteer is the mind
That was refreshing. She sounds like a verifiable scientist. In Buddhism, we practice letting go to all ego attachments which can be, "I have the answers!" We practice awareness and accept that all of reality is a projection from the mind.
But somethings are tangible and not creations of the mind
@@freedombro read “The Master and His Emissary” and then any Oliver Sachs. The way we experience reality and actual reality are two very different things. Yes things are both tangible and real. And no, that doesn’t mean we experience them as some kind of objective reality.
I use this metaphor a lot to explain perception. Two guys in the woods. One is a park ranger, the other guy is a first timer in the wilderness. It’s the exact same stimuli for both men, with two dramatically different responses, even physiologically. The ranger knows to be cautious, and avoids the bear with experience. The other guy might have a complete adrenaline dump and freeze or run. The way we experience tangible reality is often in a manner very different from our fellow humans.
@@dianelipson5420its so annoying when clueless ppl like you think youre saying something profound.. when in reality youre just huffing your own farts
@@dianelipson5420 It's not easy to be objective about our own sense of Reality. It may even be impossible.
@@markhathaway9456 oh absolutely. It’s one of those things where we must rely heavily on science for the facts. Science is our objectivity, and it too is flawed. The way the news reports unconfirmed studies trouble me. To even come close to scientific objectivity we must have multiple confirmations on the results of studies, whenever possible. Without at least one confirmation, how can we regard unrepeated results as fact?
"Fish Brain" doesn't have the same ring to it as "Lizard Brain". It's dumb and wrong but my Fish Brain wants to call it a Lizard Brain
Huh? Mammals and reptiles evolved from land dwelling basal amniotes, not fish! We needed to lay eggs on land, this ability didn’t evolve separately in the mammalian and reptile lines, it evolved once. these amniotes were already quite different from fish and basically reptiles. We of course have fish ancestors but also reptile ancestors.
Wow mind altering!!! Love the liz at the end;) thanks!
I watched this amazing lecture while we’re 2 weeks away from my wedding day. I can’t describe how you revised a major thought in me at 06:45
Please do describe! It will change your life!
Lol 😂
this makes me want to go back to school. awesome!
3 weeks earlier The Well channel posted video which is called You have 3 brains by Robert Sapolsky.
I know right, what's going on here?
Let them fight.
I thought that this was going to be about the "you only use 10% of your brain and you could use telekinesis if you used all of it" BS
Lizards can be quite intelligent. Tegus and Savanah monitors are two of several large lizards that make wonderful, if high-maintenance, pets. They can bond with their owners and can even play with toys.
Some lizards are more social creatures than once thought possible. Some pair bond, some live in burrows with extended family members.
Reptiles deserve more respect than we give them.
My experience was more with salvator monitors and heloderma, but consistent with your statement. They seek out the company of the humans in their lives.
yeah, Exothermic animals are more efficient in their internal metabolic processes, this does not mean that they are more intelligent, high top-tier predator or prey, or complex than endothermic animals.
maybe a question, if metabolic efficiency is the fundamental biological rate that governs most observed patterns in ecology, then what happen with reptile ? how does the contrary happen with human(endothermic organisms)?
is the fundamental biological rate, are not really connected with the complexity of brain?
I've seen so many video that claim to debunk the triune brain theory and then don't. It doesn't matter to me if it's true or false, I'm ready to follow the evidence, but they don't explain what is wrong.
Did anyone ever think we actually have a brain from a lizard built it?! 😂 ... I think the idea was that the functions of the brain are layered from basic/ vital/ automatic to advanced higher functions that we vontrol at will.
yes I think we all understood it as a metaphor for that, right?
@@saskiascott8181 ... That's why I was wondering what exactly was being debunked ... When we all know we don't have a brain like that of a lizard.
Carl Sagan never said that we have "lizard brains". In fact, modern reptiles and mammals both evolved from reptilian like animals (Reptiliomorpha and Amniota), back in the late carboniferous períod, 318 million years ago. Moreover, evolution has showed to the extent of exhaustion, that novel structures have to evolve by coopting preexisting ones. It's one of the basic principles underlying embryology and development.
Life is truly a never-ending sci-fi story. 💫
Well. We have to remember that the scientists are only speculating a theory that the brain developed because one animal intentionally ate another. The reason they came to that conclusion could be explained by the fact that the scientists were possibly biased due to their own primitive action of eating the flesh of other animals. This is a dangerous theory and as a vegan I oppose it. We need to continue evolving as a species and to do that we all need to go vegan. That is what I believe.🌱
good point that mammals and lizards evolved at nearly the same time from a common ancestor same with dinosaurs/birds
I love the way people within collective illusions cant see out of them,
for billions of years the instinct brain (run program and fight or flight) was the prime focus, otherwise known as the Thalamus= insects
Then for billions of years the focus was Bird/lizard electro magnetic (attachment and emotional range(meaning deciding when to fight or flight)) otherwise known as the Amygdala
Then for billions of years the focus was on the Cortices
Its that simple but , she is trapped within a confirmation bias bubble that elevates the importance of the cortices in awareness
The order to evolve comes from the base of all things and therefore to say we are not on the same branch is literally "cant see the wood for the trees"
Love the talk.................. Hate the background "music"......................
Thank you SO MUCH for this! As a neuroscientist, it annoys me no end every time someone repeats that old nonsense about lizard brains, "emotion centers" (the limbic system) etc. Another idiotic version of this myth is the "Polyvagal Theory". The brain is just too complex for these oversimplifications to work, that's why scientists can spend a lifetime trying to understand one tiny part of it. There will be no theory that explains the whole brain, deal with it.
I get what you are saying but doesn’t make evolutionary sense that the base part of the brain evolved first and was more autonomic which drove evolution of the lymbic part of the brain which allowed emotions to drive actions to survive.. eventually leading to emotions to drive abstract thinking in the prefrontal cortex and to plan for possible scenarios of the future and better manipulation of the environment?
@@MrPelham32 Ha. Using logic on scientists is hopeless. /s
@@MrPelham32 It could make sense, if brains were so clearly compartmentalized. Yes, there is some modularity, especially with regard to sensory processing, but emotions are not easy to separate from other cognitive processes, especially in the messiness of real life. There are no complex emotions without complex cognition. Even integrating complex sensory input into simple action output still requires some level of pattern recognition which can quickly get abstract. Only if both your sensory input and your action outputs are very simple, can you get away with not having many cognitive capacities, but then you also don't need any emotional complexity.
This absolutely doesn't mean thought processing doesn't function in layers of priority. It just means it isn't physically layered (i.e. is not in layers made of DNA of different "tenure"). It is equivalently the same in output as in the physically layered model.
Semantic strawman. Yes, people say "lizard brain", but we know that they're not literally referring to lizards, they're referring to the reptile ancestors of mammals. We can even see this in the newspaper clipping shown at about 2:15 in, that say "reptiles" and not "lizards".
Also, reptiles and mammals did not evolve from fish. Mammals evolved from reptiles, reptiles evolved from amphibians, and amphibians evolved from bony fishes.
So, she uses a misleading strawman, and gets the basics of The evolutionary tree wrong, so how am I supposed to trust anything else she says?
I like brain stuff, so I just bought her book on audible, will be interested to hear it.
The flip side is that I'm wondering if the "debunking" critique here is substantive, in that it seems to rest on the point that modern reptiles have structures in their brain that are homologous to non-reptile parts of the human brain. However, if they're homologous but also not comparable in terms of function while the so-called "lizard brain" is similar between humans and reptiles, then one could still defend the use of the term "lizard brain."
i love this series
Very interesting!
i recently started reading a book called the courage to be disliked which talks about teleology and trauma, and it’s a fascinating link to our purpose and goal.
we’re capable of continuously evolving as this video shows. and i think a huge stage in that human evolution is emotional intelligence and self awareness.
i highly recommend the book to anyone familiar with sigmand freud and even carl jung’s work. because it actually brings to light the work of a third prominent psychologist named alfred adler, who i think hasn’t been recognized as much. his work holds the key to how we can take charge of our own story and grow despite our past traumas and conditionings.
Name of the book pls?
@@Vantablvklegend4 Bot?
Yet again, a story comes back to something I'll never forget my dad saying when I was ~13: "We're just here to make more"
Lizard brain just alludes to the oldest or most primitive part of the brain. As far as I know. I never knew people thought that we had literally lizard’s brains
You dont have lizard brains, human have evolucted brain from primitive creatures.
So what about fight or flight? Amygdala?
"The only animal on this planet that has a lizard brain is a lizard." She was spittin!!!
I think I am still just the 'stomach on a stick'.
i've always heard it refered to as a "reptile brain," not a "lizard brain." this is literally the first context i've heard the latter used. that being said, mammals did come from reptiles, so the metaphor is still apt.
That is if we count early synapsids as being actual reptiles. Personally I doubt it since they were all far closer to us genetically than to any modern animal we classify as a 'reptiles'.
Birds evolved from reptiles, that is very clear, but I'm not that sure about mammals doing the same.
Its still not apt become reptiles are not simple instinct machines from which mammals then humans progressed. Lizards and other reptiles have evolved well past that initial reptilian ancestor and their brains are closer to that of birds than mammals. None of these animals lack the structures for higher level thought. Humans are unique in terms of our intelligence in the sense that it is just that much more advanced than any animal-but reptiles, birds, and mammals all have structures (albeit different ones) for intelligent higher level thought.
I always thought the “lizard brain” was the limbic system because reptiles have instincts and base emotions (at least fear, aggression, attraction) but not higher thought. So when you’re acting on instinct or base feelings, your “lizard brain” is driving your behavior more predominantly than your cerebral cortex
She is a beast and ahead of her time. If you read her, most psychological theories become obsolete.
The brain is definitely a predictive entity, learning that changed the way I look at the world.
Keep it up. 😊
Mammals and lizards are on different trees that split from Therapsida, often called mammal-like reptiles, and not at the point of fish.
The brain myth was immortalized in Star Trek, where Spock was rational, Bones was emotional, and Scotty was the cerebellum, which were all directed by Kirk.
So, Scotty was instinct?
All this puts me in mind of a 90s sit-com called Herman's Head.
@@originaluddite Wow, someone else who remembers it.
Spock's Brain? : )
@@MXB2001 at the time some of my friends used Herman's Head as a shorthand to understanding themselves. 😀
That's not referring to the brain. That's referring to the tripartite mind. And Scotty wasn't involved
It's, Id -Bones, Ego - Spock, and Superego - Kirk
"Explain it like Im smart" video is full of simple cartoons and is 7:14 long. It should be entitled "Make me feel like Im smart even though I'm too intellectually lazy to read a textbook or watch one of the multi hour university lectures on RUclips."
one wonders how a theory for which there is little to no evidence survives successfully up until today ...
Because as a metaphor it explains our daily behaviour in an easy and comprehensive way.
I say an appeal to authority, since Carl Sagan said it, it must be “ true.” From there it took on a life of its own.
good stories don't need to be true, they just need to be memorable
@@thedanielfuentes that's kinda true, I guess. mimetics state something similar, I believe. It's not the best ideas that get past on, but the most replicable.
For the same reason we have religions........it gives us a sense of control.
Excellent, as always. Thank you. : )
I don't feel compelled to pass my jeans along. I use them, patch and repair as needed, then trash them.
Our leading neuroscientist needs smaller scarves that don't look like neck braces.
And I never really know with her if I'm learning something or unlearning something.
I'm glad the lizard slander is finally ending.
I always connected the "lizard brain" to the area of the brain that controls our emotions, hence why we are driven to action through our emotions. Also known as the amygdala. So many of us live our lives under control of the amygdala instinct, unaware of how our emotions govern our actions, when in reality it should be the other way around. Our actions, or our mind controlling our emotions. To be aware of this is to realize that at any giving moment, our bodies respond to our environment in a very "animal" way, prompting our brains to think equal to our environment. This part of our brain hasnt evolved because we have all stayed stuck in enjoying the benefits of fight and flight adrenaline response that we all live with on a daily basis now. If we can learn to rewire our thought process eventually over time, we wont need to be so wired all the time, and quite possibly unlock different mental capacities that have been burried deep inside our brains. Could it be that we use a very limited capacity of our brain power for this reason? Until we learn to let go of anamocity, we will never evolve into something more.
yeah, we always seek an explanation for something bad that cause something what we don't want(essensially something that torture us) . how will it be, if we just accept everything, and tolerating it?
we need a special vid describing the history of the brain in detail
While the concept may be scientifically inaccurate, the metaphor has utility in the field of psychotherapy. By describing emotional and physical dysregulation as originating from an older part of the brain the experience of dysregulation may be normalized and put in context rather than judged or shamed. Escalation and agitation are normal parts of brain function, and with the application of a few simple skills we can learn to give our rational brain time to engage and improve outcomes in relationships and interactions. My staff actively and deliberately teach clients that they have a lizard brain, it's important, it's o.k. to have one, and when we keep our "evolved brain" in the drivers seat we become more effective agents in a host of situations. We get good results with this approach.
yeah, we always seek an explanation for something bad that cause something what we don't want(essensially something that torture us) . how will it be, if we just accept everything, and tolerating it?
Actually I think it's harmful to therapy, because it's based on a consequential misconception: it labels (strong) emotions as primitive and negative, and rational thought as superior, when actually the whole brain has evolved, including the "primitive" "old" parts of the brain. It has been shown that when people entirely lose emotions they make *worse* decisions. A lot of problems cannot be solved purely logically.
All parts of the brain have a function, instead of controlling "primitive" parts of the brain, and letting the "rational" part take over and dominate the rest, we should broaden our focus and listen to more voices in our brain. The issue is tunnel vision, not the emotions we feel. Another rational form of tunnel vision is not better, it's equally limited.
It's actually a harmful fallacy to keep teaching that in therapy: all parts of your brain have a useful function, numbing some out / controlling them will not make you see clearer.
What you want to do is broaden your tunnel vision, not replace it with "rational" kind of tunnel vision.
The shame and judgement of (strong) emotional responses comes from ignorance and a morale view that is simplistic. Alleviating that shame with another misunderstanding is not helpful.
It has been shown that many problems cannot be decided purely logically, and that people with no emotions will get stuck.
Tunnel vision is what creates issues, replacing it with a "rational" kind of tunnel view is not improving things, it's limiting you in other ways.
My Therapsids parents say your wrong. blup blup.
Having sat in community mental health classes telling me we have Lizard brains I am so glad to hear someone challenging this ie we don't have lizard brains because we aren't evolved from lizards! Good grief! I can now refer people to this video.
Hey! Thanks for the love Big Think BUT I've watched Big Think videos that perpetuate the lizard brain rubbish - find them and take them down!!
@@Tymbus Bare in mind that Barrett is a clinical psychologist...
We absolutely evolved from creatures anyone today would call lizards if they saw them IRL. And you seem to have miss the point. This video did nothing to address the concepts that this "story" teaches. It does NOT say the brain stem isn't responsible for basic metabolic functions, the limbic isn't isn't primarily responsible for emotions. The conclusion it makes about the about the development time of the cerebral cortex is gibberish. We don't really end up with a bigger cerebral cortex it just looks that way because it develops for longer into a bigger thing?
@@AzimuthAviationlol i love how your response is just - keep in mind, shes way smarter than me and the big words are hurting me.
@@donaldbest1154 yeah I didn't understand the point of that last bit... like what does it mean it "looks like" we have bigger prefrontal cortexes compared to the rest of our brains? Does that mean it's an optical illusion or something?
I had to lookup "metabolic" since it sounds so misterious.
What a surprise, it simply means "Stoffwechsel".
There may be an important difference between the parts of neural systems that have pre-programmed less-changeable pathways created by ancestral DNA, and the neural systems that can change and store memory...possibly related to differences in synapse chemistry. Knowing how this works might help to improve human behavior and learning.
Why do i think i have watched this exact video before.
Me too
"Stomach on a Stick"?
That sounds like alotta people I know!
Um, pretty sure "lizard brain" is a metaphor for the fight/flight survival instinct inherent in lizards, but it's not meant literally. And this is "Big Thinking"? o,O Um...
No, no: the terms was used because it was initially supposed that the structure was shared with that of lizards indicating a common evolutionary origin.
Nowadays, the term can be used to indicate a “simple and instinctual way of thinking”, but the majority of people (in the academic field too, unfortunately) think that the meaning is still literal
you would be surprised how many people take this literally ...
Well, I would say: Metaphors are never _exact_ of course, otherwise they wouldn't be metaphors after all, right? But, if we analyse metaphors just for their quality of more accurately and ingeniously representing reality seen from a specific domain (such as the scientific domain in general), it should be possible to evaluate if a metaphor is _better_ or _worse_ , for the interests of such particular context. This certainly doesn't mean we should discard metaphors at all, but we should always try to develop better, more insightful ones, according to the context.
I’m pretty disappointed by this video, but I guess this is just a case of language evolving. “Lizard brain” has become a more casual term compared to its old definition. Most of us are familiar with the new definition and didn’t know the history behind it. So… I feel misled by the title, even if it is accurate. Actually, now I’m wondering if we’re the right audience for the actual explanation in the video.
Feels like they took notes from the sound scapes in Kurtzgazad (sp?) videos.
OK sure...but when we lay people say lizard brain we don't mean we literally have a lizard's brain, we mean our primordial brain we inherited from our ancient non-human ancestors...maybe that's incorrect, too...but that's what we mean. 🥴
They don't get humor and can't read between the lines .
That's literally they idea they're debunking. you didnt inherit a primordial brain from non human ancestors, as that implies they themselves inherited a primordial brain from their ancestors, and so on and so on until oh, we all inherited part of our brain from lizards.
no. each organism has a brain that wired and rewired through every single generation a new thing, wired for that organism, and no part of it, no section is a primordial part. every generation, every organism has a brain that is wired for that organism, and not some other organism, not a lizard, not a primordial ancestor, not a fish, just that organism.
The idea that "an animal to suddenly hunt and that's why brains evolved" passes the explanatory buck by taking for granted that such a first decisive animal wouldn't have needed a brain to make the decision.. not a good basis for explaining emergence. Terrance Deacon offers an empirically testable model for the emergence of mind.
Long live free Internet Documentaries!! God bless you and Godspeed.
well, plato talked about the soul, and he didn't talk about instinct and emotion. he said similar things, but this way of putting it is identical to the medievals which tended to picture the romans as medieval in clothing, architecture and habit.
Gosh, I hope this video blows up. The pervasive use of the triune brain myth in the modern day is really frustrating. We absolutely need to, as a society, do away with the notion that logic and emotion are in contention with one another in the brain and the triune brain myth's long running history is the main contributor to that false idea.
How exactly would you tackle helping someone with an anger based impulse control issue. Would you tell them their rational and emotional selves were not really in conflict? What would you say to them as they reported watching in horror as they lost control of themselves and did and said things they regretted AS they knew they were about to do them? Myth is not a false story but one that contains truth rather than is true. This myth does not create this inner experience it just seeks to explain it.
@@donaldbest1154 I wouldn't tackle that at all, because I'm not a professional expert. This isn't a question to ask a layperson.
What I do know, is that I'm quite confident that professional experts would be operating much more efficiently if they were developing their methodologies based on updated accurate models of the human brain, instead of falling back on outdated models.
The fact of the matter is, that all the recent research in neurology and emotion shows that there is no fundamental separation between rationality and emotion. They are intrinsically linked to one another and all actions and behaviors come down stream from our instances of emotion and the concepts that our brains use to run predictions and interpret data. What good is does it do to explain someone's experience using a model of their brain that is completely false?
Not quite. Amygdala hijack is a real phenomenon and is exactly what propaganda purposely triggers so you are more suggestible. They don't call it "propaganda " any more, though. It's advertising or public relations. Watch a few videos on the science behind this and you start to see why so many of us are angry, depressed and anxious with little impulse control. Being in a frequent threat response does not lead you to greater heights of critical thinking, but instead to increased irrationality.
@@donaldbest1154 I would have the intelligence to use a better metephor than one that propagates myth, superstition, religious ideology or other hokum.
And I'd avoid relying of argumentation from lack of imagination as some kind of rationality to persist in ignorance.
@@Aaron.Thomas We are clearly concerned about different areas of ignorance. I am not concerned with truth on some ideal level. You can't just say you would replace practical tools you need to actually do it. Or I consider your enlightenment darkness.
Didn’t mammals evolve from synapsids? And synapsids evolve from reptiles? Like correct me if I’m wrong but reptiles and mammals didn’t split off when life first grew legs and walked on land.
Synapsids and reptiles evolved separately from a basal amnoite very soon after the amniote egg evolved. They are sister clades. The reptile (saurapsid) and synapsids lines evolved seperately from a common ancestor.
@@davidderubeis7335 Cool, thanks for clearing that up! Learn something new everyday lol
Diane Keaton vibes.
Annie who
I feel like this is something that was used as a metaphor for where functions are or what functions are more basic and primordial, but then it was taken literally. As if evolution works by just putting another layer on top.
I don't think this video did anything to refute - whatever it is she thinks she is refuting. Often times scientists cherry pick and only notice what isn't working about a common understanding of a thing and argue against it's flaws without honoring OR replacing the utility of this understanding. This video is guilty of that. Of course - for instance our motor control needed to evolve with our changing bodies. So if people think that simply because our expanded cerebral cortex is where the hominid action mostly was. Its not hard to point out that some parts of tool use required changes deeper down. It doesn't just look like mice have a smaller cerebral cortex they do all that extra time results in a much larger brain to body mass and much larger cerebrals cortex verses the rest.... Her statements seem less accurate than any misconception she is trying to debunk. Genetics debunks the tripart brain because of development times??? We don't have lizard brains because our first amniote ancestors (who meet any lay persons idea of a lizard exactly) weren't technically lizards from a scientists point of view you need to understand jargon like post orbital fenestra's to understand. I say leave science communication to people like Carl Sagan and stop trying to contradict him. When you show your ignorance of common sense you look like a fool legitimately.
My guy, you do realize that Lisa Feldman Barrett is in the top 1% of cited neuroscience researchers right
@@rowanaster3986so are you saying she is not cherry picking data? Is she beyond reproach?
@@freedombro Nope. Didn't say that. Dude said she's showing her ignorance, and I can assure you she's not ignorant. Having read her books, many of the papers her lab has published, and watched hours of lectures and interviews about her research, I'm much more confident that to lay the blame on Big Think for poor editing. Especially given that they're a pop sci publication.
Lisa Feldman Barrett is doing her best to increase the PR and better the public understanding around neuroscientific concepts that have gone wildly misunderstood for a long time. Emotions being the big one. Triune brain myth has a lot to do with that. So, it makes sense that she'd do a few video segments for Big Think to try and further disseminate her lab's research.
I agree with your comments.
Just, not about the person you're referring to. someone else here.
@@rowanaster3986 This has no relevance to the question of this as successful peace of communication to the general public. She probably benefits greatly from the peer review process. Your appeal to authority is not logical response.
3:40 really intrigued me...
It's refreshing to hear a scientist admit that explanations for why evolution occurs are inherently subjective. Science addresses how, not why.
There is no teleological cause behind evolution (except perhaps human teleological causes in cases of selective breeding); the questions of “why” could pertain more to evolutionary pressures behind various adaptations/trajectories (at particular points in time), and questions of “how” could pertain more to the mechanisms through which evolution occurs.
For therapeutic purposes, the triune brain serves a metaphorical purpose - and in part, is felt internally as experientially having value to make sense of our lived experience & different motivations. However, in modern CBT, in particular CFT, there is more of a recognition of our various motivations, and uses a metaphor for our drive-threat & soothing systems. Lisa's theory is quite a physically reductionist model? Mere thoughts...
I don't think it invalidates any of that. That group of structures called the "lizard brain" didn't evolve from lizards, that's all.
I would argue that it's not a useful metaphorical concept, but what she's pointing out is that the concept of the triune brain is not a metaphor. This is a real neurological model that has existed for 50 years. And it has been the leading model of the human brain for far too long, because it's not accurate. It doesn't even come close to describing how the human brain evolved, how it develops, or how it processes sense data. I don't think it's useful to use metaphorical concepts that draw on a truncated representation of the human brain. I think we are more than capable of coming up with metaphors that map onto modern models of how the human brain functions without sacrificing any efficacy in their application
@@meech3576 I don't even need to, because Big Think released another video last week with the same researcher, Lisa Feldman Barrett, explaining emotions better than I ever could.
Don't fall into the trap of believing that every person that identifies the inefficacy of something must also be the one to identify the solution. It's an unreasonable way to approach the concept of problem solving.
In fact, I'd recommend you engage with all of LFB's work, as she has a litany of brilliant metaphors for the brain as a modern model.
@@meech3576 additionally, I don't think you give your fellow sapiens enough credit, if you think we need oversimplified metaphors that function on an outdated model to explain this stuff to laypeople. People aren't stupid. They're underinformed
@@meech3576 Ok my guy. I dunno why you're so adversarial. Do you I guess.