This interview has made my day. And for Dr. Sapolsky to admit his depression is a profound relief to me for some reason. To know that one of my role models is dealing with something I am provides me with hope. I hope to one day help others in the way he has helped me!
"Since then [age 13] I have had zero capacity for religiosity, spirituality, or for believing that the universe is anything other than cold, empty, unempathic, and pointless. And I've been depressed ever since" (Sapolsky December 2020). Perhaps Sapolsky's adolescent rebellion against an overly strict religious upbringing, and the resultant depression concomitant upon those decisions have drawn him into an obsessive need to rationalize those materialist presuppositions which he may be unwilling to discard. One’s adolescent rebellion against legalism together with a cultural predisposition which adamantly refutes any hint of theological syncretism should not blind a brilliant mind to that which is. The learned professor it seems has determined not only that there is no God, but oddly enough, that there are no scientists.
@kkyu "he got the God part right" ---- The term "God" as used in classical theism refers to existence in and of itself. It is incoherent to posit existence to "not be".
It’s available on RUclips in full if you search something like “waking up the biology of good and evil” I tried to share the link in the RUclips app but I’ve not managed too
All anybody with a brain, literally, needs to know about their physical self is found in Behave. Robert Sapolsky is gentle warrior in the knowledge of mankind.
At circa 43 minutes, Sapolsky mentions the effect of Prozac ( or any of the other SSRI's). His discussion of whether people feel like they are different than they normally might be may be usual in the clinical situations he has seen. My use of Zoloft was an enjoyable experience, I remember mentioning to others that I hadn't felt better since I was in grade school. Fortunately, I no longer take or need to take that medication, but I have to wonder if the changes a person experiences can cause or relieve needs for such medications. I wish my father, who most likely had heavy clinical depression throughout the Great Depression and WWII had been able to have decent antidepressants of that type when he was younger. Perhaps since one needed to 'buck up' in those periods of loss and feeling distraught he might have actually helped him to keep going.
That "might be may be" notion made me re-read this like 5 times. But your words were more than generally conveyed with accuracy. It can be noted the ability to vocalize mentally amd abstractly convey this experience is something most definitely harder for genetic males to do than genetic females. It shows a contrast and tells a tale of the potential roles weve played in one anothers genetic histories since the dawn of history. History marked the era of humans that no longer repeated mistakes for eternity instead we began gradually try to fix the bad with only examples of worse around us.
Ok this might be counterintuitive to your confirmation-biased superiority complexes but I think maybe you are a clueless monkey? Its a working hypothesis I have. Btw. here have some crack you can smoke.
@Mike Turner Care to specify, and demonstrate, exactly WHERE Robert Sapolsky, a world-renowned neurologist, is "wrong" in his book? Please, tell me. I'm all ears.
Depression for me was and is a very strange thing I can recognize it coming now I can be walking and feeling normal when it feels like my energy is draining down through my body into the ground and I'm sinking sinking sinking... I hope that more and more people will realize they're misconceptions. A tough business
Is it really a “Whole lot easier to operate with a notion of agency” or is it a whole lot harder (scarier) to function in your group without conforming to its value system, set from your parents from the moment you were expected to have some level of autonomy, mirroring their ideas and behaviours? Seems we empathise with those to whom we can relate, thinking in-group out-group and feasibility for forming of bonds. Really saddening to hear sapolsky, whi has such a positive influence on the world, talking about suffering from depression. So nice to relate to people who’re not afraid to discuss these ideas. Great podcast.
27:00 The criminal justice system in general, around most of the world, is ridiculously Medieval, with judges telling defendants they hope he rots in hell (WTF?) This is astoundingly inappropriate.
My 62 year old female neighbour during the day at work she doesn’t drink or smoke. After work she is an alcoholic and chain smoker who can’t stop and spends every penny on this illness. One can hold these feelings back for so long and then they come like a tidal wave. Same with yo-yo diets. They can only control for a short time.
Great content, but there is terrible phase cancelation in the audio from a very short (3-4ms) delayed doubled. Possibly a bad stereo effect? Mistake in moving audio around (stereo l & r out of phase?) or really terrible compression.
1:05 agh, it's a strange coincidence that my 77 year old father has recently been diagnosed with this disease. We're checking if it's genetically-linked soon.
what about free will in flow state? i think it is the only time there could be a free will, seemingly paradoxical, only once the self is discarded, or rather transcended
This is what happens when Jnanam (knowledge) is at work without Bhakti (devotion). Eventually the knowledge should turn into compassion and love. Otherwise it is useless. These guys are great. ❤
Dr Sapolsky said not to take pleasure in delivering retaliation (when this will actually change the behavior), but I have to wonder, why not? Where does this "should" come from? If the person does not have free will, then them feeling pleasure while delivering retaliation is not something they chose or they can influence, is it?
"Since then [age 13] I have had zero capacity for religiosity, spirituality, or for believing that the universe is anything other than cold, empty, unempathic, and pointless. And I've been depressed ever since" (Sapolsky December 2020). Perhaps Sapolsky's adolescent rebellion against an overly strict religious upbringing, and the resultant depression concomitant upon those decisions have drawn him into an obsessive need to rationalize those materialist presuppositions which he may be unwilling to discard. One’s adolescent rebellion against legalism together with a cultural predisposition which adamantly refutes any hint of theological syncretism should not blind a brilliant mind to that which is. The learned professor it seems has determined not only that there is no God, but oddly enough, that there are no scientists.
@@INTERNATIONALvids "focus too much on the messenger than on the message"-- In a "cold, empty, unempathic, and pointless" reality there is neither messenger nor message, hominids nor fallacies.
Hi. I know I risk sounding like a complete idiot but I've been doing a bit of research on the Mbti and basically how it originated from Carl Jungs study, but dnt I really dnt know wat to make of it, n was wondering if anyone who has done sufficient study on it , could tell me what they think of it, n whether they find it to be legit or just another theory put together based on arbitrary concepts.
Uncharitable as it may be, from a sociological standpoint retribution for criminally aberrant behavior may not be entirely unnecessary. It reinforces social norms, social identity, and hierarchy. It also provides a socially acceptable outlet for aggression, however sublimated. As do violent spectator sports. We're usually loathe to admit this because we have a competing interest in compassion and charity, but as a species humans are both inherently loving and inherently violent.
absolutely how you think us as humans have always been able to push it too the limit and advance as much as we have? do you know how many people died to make scuba diving possible? its hard to comprehend just how crazy the 20th century was but trust me it was
Can people change by themselves through thinking and reflection and understanding? Please answer me, you both or anybody else who believe in free will?
Slomofly wrote “No, we don't have ‘free’ will, we have individual will.” ----- That claim implies that individual will is not free. What evidence do you have to backup that assertion? And other than individual will - what other kind is there? Group will?
Slomofly I asked you for evidence. Do you see anywhere in your comment where you provided ANY? No. You do not. All we see is a series of assertions. (Sports Fans: No surprise there at all. Nothing to see here folks ... move along)
You were asked for evidence for your claims. You have now had multiple opportunities to present it. Do we see any? No. Still nothing but semi-coherent babbling. Maybe you should melt into cyberspace and come back in about 10 years after you complete that ESL course I advised you to take.
Every comment you write contains a bucket load of bullshit and ... zero evidence. I'm not interested in how logical you perceive yourself to be. It is clear that you desperately need an introductory class in science and how it works. Science doesn't advance based on bullshit arguments or logic ... it advances on evidence. Maybe you're new to debating and don't understand how that works either: you don't tell people "go read this link" or "watch this video." If you can't back up your shit, then get the fuck off the internet and quit embarrassing yourself, your family, your pets, and your friend.
Free will Abu Hanifa was once teaching Islamic beliefs to his students. He was arguing and challenging the validity of some of the statements which had been proclaimed by his teacher sixth Imam, Imam Jafar Sadiq (as). Bahlool Dana happened to be present as well. Abu Hanifa proclaimed that he could not agree with the three understated statements as made by sixth Imam, Imam Jafar Sadiq (as). The first one was that "Allah (SWT) can never be seen." According to Abu Hanifa it was impossible for a thing to exist and yet be invisible! The second thing that sixth Imam, Imam Jafar Sadiq (as) had stated was that "Shaitan (Satan) will be thrown in the inferno of Hell which will scorch him bitterly." Abu Hanifa argued: "How it was possible for fire to hurt 'fire', the fact that Shaitan (Satan) was created from fire itself!" The third statement of sixth Imam, Imam Jafar Sadiq (as) was that "Man alone is responsible for his actions and Allah (SWT) - the most powerful - has nothing to do with his actions." "How is it possible, when Allah (SWT) alone guides the destiny of man without Whose will nothing can happen?" This was Abu Hanifa's third challenge. As soon as the speaker, Abu Hanifa, had made these three criticisms against his teacher sixth Imam, Imam Jafar Sadiq (as), Bahlool Dana got up, took a piece of brick and aiming at Abu Hanifa, let it go and cracked Abu Hanifa head. Bahlool Dana was caught and taken before the Judge for punishment. In his defense, he pleaded that he had done nothing else except reply to the three criticisms which Abu Hanifa had made against sixth Imam, Imam Jafar Sadiq (as). The Judge asked him to explain as to how and why he chose to reply by hitting and injuring Abu Hanifa. Bahlool said, "This man claims that if Allah (SWT) is there, then he must be seen. He is now complaining of pain in his head due to the brick having hurt him. If the pain is definitely there, can he show me where it is? Well! Just as pain can be there without being seen Allah (SWT) also exists without being seen." "Secondly, Abu Hanifa says that fire cannot burn fire. It is a fact that man is made out of clay and this brick with which I hit his head is also made out of clay, if clay can inflict pain and hurt clay, why can't fire do the same to fire?" "The third thing Abu Hanifa says is that man is not responsible for his own actions but Allah (SWT) does all things. If this is so, then why does he want justice from you and why does he want me to be punished for hurting him? He might as well transfer the punishment to Allah (SWT) Who, according to him - is responsible for all the actions of man!" Everyone in the court was stunned at this and Abu Hanifa was dumb founded - having nothing to say. So Bahlool Dana was released without any punishment. Thus, while some Muslim sects believe that Allah (SWT) can be seen, perhaps on the Day of Judgement, the Shia Muslims say that Allah (SWT) is the creator of everything; He was not created and as such he has no body like us that can be seen. If we can still believe in unseen things like air, electricity and human soul, why can't we believe in the unseen Allah (SWT)? If we are responsible for our actions and are to be punished or rewarded accordingly, then it is only fair and just that Allan (SWT) should not manipulate or compel us to do things but leave us alone to act the way we see it fit, and be answerable for those actions ourselves. facebook.com/notes/14noor-%D9%84%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%83-%D9%8A%D8%A7-%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%AD%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B5%D8%B1-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B2%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86-/bahlool-dana-wisdom-proves-the-three-facts-to-abu-hanifa-belief-in-allah-tawhid/331938527717/
Slomofly wrote “You act. No matter why, you are responsible. It's all you.” ----- If someone threatened to kill you if you don’t spray paint a swastika on a wall, why do you think all responsibility falls on you? If you refuse to do it and you are shot, where did you get the idea that you are responsible for getting shot for refusing to engage in vandalism? Or, using your logic(?), when a girl is raped ... it’s her fault? Please explain. I’m sure everyone would love to hear your response.
If rape is not the girl's fault, then you have just confessed that your assertions are false. There is no logic that can save you when you set yourself on fire like that. Thanks for the public immolation. That was spectacular
Slomo, No one cares about your context or logic. What you have been asked for, repeatedly, is evidence. What you have provided in response is ... zilch. Slomo - go find yourself a nice Jesus site to hang out on. You can torment Ghost Worshipers to your heart's content with all your distraction techniques and logical fallacies. But on science sites, you are only going to get shredded into tiny little pieces, like I have just done to you. At this point, there isn't enough left of you to make Roadkill Soup.
Slomo, I didn't bother to read your last 2 comments. It is like talking to a wall ... that someone spray painted with shit. It is obvious that you have zero answers for anything, and have one of those arrogant, little-boy personalities that refuse to ever let you admit that you are wrong. I'm through dickin' around with you. Slomo - you are Disssssssssssss-Misssssssssssssed. NEXT!
The Dorsal Lateral Pfc [01:59] Charles Whitman [11:26] Sundowner Syndrome [29:07] Moral Mirage [31:01] The Auschwitz Album [36:21] What Do You To Happen in the Next 50 Years [41:07] The Exodus [44:51]
Someone, help, please - ive been watching Sam Harris for years, and i just dont understand this "we dont have freewill" thing. I can eat an apple,or a banana, something else, or nothing - i am free to chose, therefore i have freewill. I can stay in bed, or go to the park, i am free to chose, therefore i have freewill. Obviously my undertanding of the word must be to blame, but i dont underdtand how else the word "freewill" can be understood...?
You just listened to a detailed discussion by two people articulating how, from their perspective, (a) we do not have free will, and (b) of course it certainly feels like we do. Is the problem you are expressing really one of "understanding" their position, or is it the overwhelming feel of (b).
Basically free will is an illusion. Obviously most people feel like they have free will. It doesn't mean they actually have it. It is an illusion like thinking a mirage in the desert and swearing it is a lake. For example, was it your free will what type of home, parents, society, time period you were born in to? No. Yet these things decide what ice cream flavor you will choose.
Hey Sport Fans - Read this reply I just received and guess how old this guy is. Here was his comment: Slomofly wrote "So just shut up and I'll go away. Keep babbling stupidity at me and I'll keep answering. Your choice" So basically he just said "Stop it! Give me the last word or I will stay here forever!" This gives you an idea of the mentality and maturity of Sam Harris' Fan Boys. Now you know why they call them "Boys"
Hey Sports Fans - check the logic in Slomo's last comment. He posts a comment and then claims I had the last word. This guy needs to take his logic circuit board back to Radio Shack. Hopefully, it's still under warranty. This is the kind of crap you always get from Sam Harris Fan Boys. They scream, whine, complain, cwy der widdle eyes out, and then ... do it all over again. Slomo - you have been Dissssssss-Missssssssed. NEXT!
Slomo You've been asked to leave nicely. Yet, like a fart vapor in a small delicatessen ... you refuse to dissipate. I'm going to have to turn you over to Big Mike. He is a guy (or could be a girl) who many RUclipsrs go to when they have trolls like you, who stick to them like wet boogers that can't be wiped off. He's a busy guy, so please be patient. He'll get around to you when he's free.
The notion of 'Free will' at the ultimate level being discussed here brings itself into a self-contradiction similar to the philosophical problem of 'absolute claim of relativism'. -- If Free will is ultimately a psychological illusion, then it also follows logically from that that we cannot decide if we believe/should act in accordance with the idea of free will or not. It is a meaningless proposition to try to convince people of any fact, any action or any attitude, since that very motivation is played out mechanically/chaotically and therefore cannot be changed. This leads to the collapse of morality as we know it. In some way, no matter how far we push towards reductive determinism we still can't escape the intuition that we are beings in some way transcendent to those very mechanics. (Not religious necessarily but in terms of language and the phenomenology of being capable of meta-reflection. There is no particular virtue in choosing to believe that you have no choice. Since that choice itself is not possible according to a completely rational view. Maybe it's something like a Xenon paradox.
Great comment! I agree. I think to take the reductionistic/deterministic seriously results in crippling cognitive dissonance. They have good points, but to claim to know for certain that our intuition for free will is completely false, is kind of arrogant. Where is the doubt? It could be that the reductionistic world view is partially correct, but is blind to genuinely creative phenomena that emerge from the substrate of an apparently deterministic physical reality. Sorry for wordiness but i think it makes sense.
Slomofly wrote “There always has to be a mechanism that allows anything to work.” ----- That assertion assumes that free will has no mechanism. Who made that claim? If you can’t point to someone who claimed that, then you have built a Straw Man. To defeat the Straw Man accusation, simply provide us with a link to a scientist who said that.
Slomofly Did you provide the name of a scientist who made the claim you asserted, as you were asked? No. You did not. Straw Man confirmed. Come on Slomo, keep your guard up. You are making this waaay too easy.
My, you are starting to lose your shit, aren't you? If this is getting too rough for you Slomo, feel free to bail out and run as fast as your widdle wegs can carry you to your "Safe Space." I don't need a Determinist (Calvinist) to tell me what scientists think. "In general" may cut it in religion but it doesn't fly in a scientific debate. Relying on your "Appeal to Authority" works when there is a scientific consensus, but is no different than religion in other cases, such as this one, where there is no consensus. Harris and Sapolsky have the same amount of evidence as you do ... ZERO. That's why you are getting sliced and diced in front of everyone on RUclips. Instead of challenging those guys for evidence, you blindly accepted their bullshit, which is why you are now getting thrashed savagely back-and-forth like a gazelle caught in the jaws of a lion. Advice: Don't blindly accept bullshit. Ask. Demand answers. If you follow that advice (which you don't seem smart enough to do) you will put others in the position that you now find yourself in; and it will save you a ton of humiliation.
How do you explain criminals who hide their crimes? An uncontrollable impulse is blind. Choices are made to protect themselves from detection by the general public who will punish them if they are caught. Abusers hide their violence behind closed doors. It is like a hierarchy of options as in what they can get away with in the current situation. Like a child pushing their boundaries in a new environment or with new people. Yes there are too many factors from various disciplines that determine both the impulse and the choice to choose a safe environment to enact those inappropriate actions, but a choice is made. There is a level of choice and accountability, what determines that level may or may not include any level of actual agency is unknown. As far as sensory input like smell I would agree that most humans are mentally lazy and choose to run on a type of autopilot but I do not agree that it is indicative of all humans. You are both examples of humans that are not afraid to pay attention and choose to attempt to modify your own behavior accordingly. I follow both of your works and enjoy the thought provoking well thought out ideas that you both present. I think about what you are saying and that is why I have questions.
You have no choice but to not do commit such crimes because you are not the one who was born and nurtured the ways were necessary to it. We can call it luck.
@@LateButGreat what you are stating is based on assumptions about my life which you know nothing about. You are also parroting popular social opinion. So enjoy letting popular opinion do your thinking for you. You can not imagine that the question that I am posing is based on personal experience and years of research. So frankly you can't offer me a real answer. All you can do is regurgitate what you have been told.
@@gigipah Are you saying free will skepticism is popular opinion? Really? Look, what I said was not personal, in fact I'm saying that biological, cultural and social predispositions are as self-control ability matter of luck because we don't have ultimate control of anything. A behavior is an effect in a causal chain which extends back to long past times and deeper levels of nature. Causes are also effects and we are not free of physical laws. But if I'm wrong you could talk about your research and show us how you came to be in the opposite direction all natural and neurosciences are going since last century.
@@LateButGreat so you are saying that the debate between nurture and nature has been settled? Are you saying that everyone in a specific demographic are carbon copies of each other? There is divergence from house to house and individual to individual raised in the same neighborhood and same circumstances.
Slomofly wrote “Unique Individual will is self evident.” ----- You should know better than to use Christian Apologetic arguments in a scientific debate. They might fly on Jesus videos - but not here. (btw, “self evident” should be hyphenated and you only need to capitalize the first letter of the sentence)
Slomofly, "self-evident" is not an answer (even when correctly punctuated). If having your numerous spelling and grammatical errors exposed, bothers you, you might want to consider developing the discipline to proofread your comments before posting them and exposing yourself to ridicule in front of everyone on RUclips. Advice: ESL at a fine high school near you.
Slomo Nice try, but that is the same desperate ploy that all semi-literate commenters resort to when their lack of education and mental laziness are exposed for everyone to laugh at. Advice: instead of digging your hole even deeper, try educating yourself and learning how to use the language properly. That won't help you with your inability to explain why you blindly accept bullshit, but at least you won't look as ignorant while you are embarrassing yourself. You obviously fancy yourself as a logical person. Newsflash - so do religious nuts (just ask them). But from all the agonizing comments I've suffered through I haven't seen any evidence that you possess enough logic skills to power a keychain flashlight.
Slomofly wrote “Free will is impossible and meaningless..” ----- How do you know it is impossible? Why do you think it is meaningless? Why did you end your sentence with two periods? Did you stutter?
Another brilliant response. As long as that makes sense to you, I guess that's all that matters. The rest of us can just ignore it since you didn't really say anything coherent. For all the Sports Fans, here are the 2 questions which you couldn't answer, and are doing your best to run away from: How do you know it is impossible? Why do you think it is meaningless? You've had days. If you need weeks or months - take them. Come back when you figure something out.
Your entire reply was based on the opening assertion "Will = conditioning." Yet you offer nothing to back up your assertion (that's why they call it an assertion). Also, you are assuming your conclusion in your premise (also known as "begging the question"). But no matter how many chances you are given, the one thing everyone is still waiting for is ... one stinkin bit of evidence. I could cut/paste that into every religious argument on RUclips. That's why you "Determinists" are nothing more than a Calvinist ... without a Bible. (btw, it's obvious you are making an effort to use correct spelling and grammar to relieve the rest of us from suffering through your comments. So you get points for the improvement)
TL;DNR I clicked "Read More" and then closed it right back up. People might be more inclined to read your comments if you don't write your whole fucking life story. But thanks for all the time and effort. I'm sure it was interesting ... for you
Lapolsky super smart - but - he strikes out on free will. Just because we have biological & social tendencies - does not mean that we are unable to make a choice. Our consciousness empowers us to analyze the data coming in & make a move. Within that processing, our character is tested. and revealed The end result may be predictable - but - it is not pre-determined. If you will: within the percentage of unpredictability - there lies our ability to freely choose which course of action we take. We may not be 100% free - but - we are also not 100% enslaved either. We know where the plane is gonna land - but - during the flight - we cab freely choose the movie.
I have known about Robert Sapolsky for at least 8 to 10 years longer that Sam Harris. While I don't always agree with Mr. Harris, I feel as if he has been unfairly denigrated for speaking his mind. There are many things he says that are very helpful and memorable. Sapolsky teaches at Stanford and was available at the Infinite Mind, at least that was the first place I heard him. He is a much in demand teacher and speaker and one can find a number of classes he teaches (quite edifying) on RUclips.
This interview has made my day. And for Dr. Sapolsky to admit his depression is a profound relief to me for some reason. To know that one of my role models is dealing with something I am provides me with hope. I hope to one day help others in the way he has helped me!
God be with you sir
"Since then [age 13] I have had zero capacity for religiosity, spirituality, or for believing that the universe is anything other than cold, empty, unempathic, and pointless. And I've been depressed ever since" (Sapolsky December 2020).
Perhaps Sapolsky's adolescent rebellion against an overly strict religious upbringing, and the resultant depression concomitant upon those decisions have drawn him into an obsessive need to rationalize those materialist presuppositions which he may be unwilling to discard. One’s adolescent rebellion against legalism together with a cultural predisposition which adamantly refutes any hint of theological syncretism should not blind a brilliant mind to that which is. The learned professor it seems has determined not only that there is no God, but oddly enough, that there are no scientists.
@kkyu "he got the God part right" ----
The term "God" as used in classical theism refers to existence in and of itself. It is incoherent to posit existence to "not be".
I am also an atheist to the God that Robert is referring too. Check out the Vedanta definition. It’s just “consciousness” itself. ❤ I love these guys.
Good grief. This is one of the best podcasts I've ever listened to on this topic. These two are an incredibly good combo.
Any chance of re-uploading this with better audio?
Yes
@@maryamHayaly No?
It’s available on RUclips in full if you search something like “waking up the biology of good and evil”
I tried to share the link in the RUclips app but I’ve not managed too
@@jamespaternoster7354 Thank you do much..I found the better audio and it is too bad they don't take this one down
@@lindakautzman7388 thanks for not sharing it with the rest of us
Got GOOSEBUMPS when i first saw that there was an interview of Rob by Sam!
All anybody with a brain, literally, needs to know about their physical self is found in Behave. Robert Sapolsky is gentle warrior in the knowledge of mankind.
That's the truth. Ty!
I liked the back and forth. But then again... I had no choice.
blue Funny.
At circa 43 minutes, Sapolsky mentions the effect of Prozac ( or any of the other SSRI's). His discussion of whether people feel like they are different than they normally might be may be usual in the clinical situations he has seen. My use of Zoloft was an enjoyable experience, I remember mentioning to others that I hadn't felt better since I was in grade school. Fortunately, I no longer take or need to take that medication, but I have to wonder if the changes a person experiences can cause or relieve needs for such medications. I wish my father, who most likely had heavy clinical depression throughout the Great Depression and WWII had been able to have decent antidepressants of that type when he was younger. Perhaps since one needed to 'buck up' in those periods of loss and feeling distraught he might have actually helped him to keep going.
That "might be may be" notion made me re-read this like 5 times. But your words were more than generally conveyed with accuracy. It can be noted the ability to vocalize mentally amd abstractly convey this experience is something most definitely harder for genetic males to do than genetic females. It shows a contrast and tells a tale of the potential roles weve played in one anothers genetic histories since the dawn of history. History marked the era of humans that no longer repeated mistakes for eternity instead we began gradually try to fix the bad with only examples of worse around us.
Ok this might be counterintuitive to your confirmation-biased superiority complexes but I think maybe you are a clueless monkey? Its a working hypothesis I have. Btw. here have some crack you can smoke.
Best most illuminating content I've encountered on the web. Makes me stop to type the Gratitude!!!!
MORE PEOPLE HAVE TO KNOW ABOUT ROBERT...PICK UP HIS BOOK BEHAVE ...
Iliya Peshikan Too bad he's so clearly wrong
@Mike Turner
Care to specify, and demonstrate, exactly WHERE Robert Sapolsky, a world-renowned neurologist, is "wrong" in his book? Please, tell me. I'm all ears.
That book is one of the very best ones out there, a tour de force: very heavy on the science, but explained in a very entertaining "Sapolskian" style.
Depression for me was and is a very strange thing I can recognize it coming now I can be walking and feeling normal when it feels like my energy is draining down through my body into the ground and I'm sinking sinking sinking... I hope that more and more people will realize they're misconceptions. A tough business
Must be such a relief for Sapolsky to finally be interviewed by someone on his intellectual level that knows exactly what he's talking about
Ja haha so lonly in this world maybe tho because im not medicated adhd/sct/?? could be that
That is ridiculous, no one is on his intellectual level.
@@333btd LOUDER, for the people in the BACK!!!!😂
@@333btd
Love it. Sapolsky is a legend.
@@333btdyes but someone closer to him than anyone else i know of.. it was noice
Is it really a “Whole lot easier to operate with a notion of agency” or is it a whole lot harder (scarier) to function in your group without conforming to its value system, set from your parents from the moment you were expected to have some level of autonomy, mirroring their ideas and behaviours?
Seems we empathise with those to whom we can relate, thinking in-group out-group and feasibility for forming of bonds.
Really saddening to hear sapolsky, whi has such a positive influence on the world, talking about suffering from depression. So nice to relate to people who’re not afraid to discuss these ideas. Great podcast.
I am blown away by this. Thank you both so much!
what's with the metallic sound?
27:00 The criminal justice system in general, around most of the world, is ridiculously Medieval, with judges telling defendants they hope he rots in hell (WTF?) This is astoundingly inappropriate.
no its not its the same courtroom as the inquisition basically a replica idk if the inquisition ever ended
@@ianmoore732
Sad! The methods are not there, but the attitude definitely is.
@@inquisitive.lurker everything that happens in our courts are ecclesiastical
Was Robert Sapolsky in Braveheart?
Audio is bad
terrible
The sound quality is terrible.
Two of my favourites
I feel like I’m on acid with the quality of the audio
Two of the best minds on the planet today.
I want to be a good robot.
My 62 year old female neighbour during the day at work she doesn’t drink or smoke. After work she is an alcoholic and chain smoker who can’t stop and spends every penny on this illness. One can hold these feelings back for so long and then they come like a tidal wave. Same with yo-yo diets. They can only control for a short time.
Great content, but there is terrible phase cancelation in the audio from a very short (3-4ms) delayed doubled. Possibly a bad stereo effect? Mistake in moving audio around (stereo l & r out of phase?) or really terrible compression.
Is the quality of this upload meant to be so bad that listeners are goaded into visiting Hariss' site?
1:05 agh, it's a strange coincidence that my 77 year old father has recently been diagnosed with this disease. We're checking if it's genetically-linked soon.
Such a shame, poor sound quality makes it impossible to listen to.
what about free will in flow state? i think it is the only time there could be a free will, seemingly paradoxical, only once the self is discarded, or rather transcended
what a shame about the audio
How many years away are we from free will and what will the very first choice be the day I try to live
Thanks for the link...
This is what happens when Jnanam (knowledge) is at work without Bhakti (devotion). Eventually the knowledge should turn into compassion and love. Otherwise it is useless. These guys are great. ❤
I just had the thought of John Candy breaking off a switch to punish the horse as though it were a child.. the Great Outdoors, I think. 😂
Is there audio without shit audio
Dr Sapolsky said not to take pleasure in delivering retaliation (when this will actually change the behavior), but I have to wonder, why not? Where does this "should" come from?
If the person does not have free will, then them feeling pleasure while delivering retaliation is not something they chose or they can influence, is it?
There is so much to disagree with in this discussion, and I really enjoyed listening to it as well.
Why are a couple of guys who don't believe in free will talking about their choices in recreational drug use?
Robert Sapolskiy I want studying with you!!!
The sound quality though
The brain is the most important organ in the body, according to the brain.
love that
I love sam harris and robert sapolsky...
why is the audio so bad.
"Since then [age 13] I have had zero capacity for religiosity, spirituality, or for believing that the universe is anything other than cold, empty, unempathic, and pointless. And I've been depressed ever since" (Sapolsky December 2020).
Perhaps Sapolsky's adolescent rebellion against an overly strict religious upbringing, and the resultant depression concomitant upon those decisions have drawn him into an obsessive need to rationalize those materialist presuppositions which he may be unwilling to discard. One’s adolescent rebellion against legalism together with a cultural predisposition which adamantly refutes any hint of theological syncretism should not blind a brilliant mind to that which is. The learned professor it seems has determined not only that there is no God, but oddly enough, that there are no scientists.
@andrewferg8737
You fall for ad-hominem fallacy.
You focus too much on the messenger than on the message.
@@INTERNATIONALvids "focus too much on the messenger than on the message"--
In a "cold, empty, unempathic, and pointless" reality there is neither messenger nor message, hominids nor fallacies.
Great vid
Hi. I know I risk sounding like a complete idiot but I've been doing a bit of research on the Mbti and basically how it originated from Carl Jungs study, but dnt I really dnt know wat to make of it, n was wondering if anyone who has done sufficient study on it , could tell me what they think of it, n whether they find it to be legit or just another theory put together based on arbitrary concepts.
How are they not confusing free will and behavior?
Uncharitable as it may be, from a sociological standpoint retribution for criminally aberrant behavior may not be entirely unnecessary. It reinforces social norms, social identity, and hierarchy. It also provides a socially acceptable outlet for aggression, however sublimated. As do violent spectator sports. We're usually loathe to admit this because we have a competing interest in compassion and charity, but as a species humans are both inherently loving and inherently violent.
absolutely how you think us as humans have always been able to push it too the limit and advance as much as we have? do you know how many people died to make scuba diving possible? its hard to comprehend just how crazy the 20th century was but trust me it was
RESPECTING SPOLASKY NO DRUG AND ALCOHOL POLICY..I too have never indulged and find it sad that so many people mess with these substances.
what does anybody think about robert lustig ?
Can people change by themselves through thinking and reflection and understanding?
Please answer me, you both or anybody else who believe in free will?
❤
Slomofly wrote “No, we don't have ‘free’ will, we have individual will.”
-----
That claim implies that individual will is not free.
What evidence do you have to backup that assertion?
And other than individual will - what other kind is there? Group will?
Slomofly
I asked you for evidence. Do you see anywhere in your comment where you provided ANY?
No. You do not. All we see is a series of assertions.
(Sports Fans: No surprise there at all. Nothing to see here folks ...
move along)
You were asked for evidence for your claims.
You have now had multiple opportunities to present it.
Do we see any?
No.
Still nothing but semi-coherent babbling. Maybe you should melt into cyberspace and come back in about 10 years after you complete that ESL course I advised you to take.
Every comment you write contains a bucket load of bullshit and ...
zero evidence.
I'm not interested in how logical you perceive yourself to be.
It is clear that you desperately need an introductory class in science and how it works.
Science doesn't advance based on bullshit arguments or logic ...
it advances on evidence.
Maybe you're new to debating and don't understand how that works either:
you don't tell people "go read this link" or "watch this video."
If you can't back up your shit, then get the fuck off the internet
and quit embarrassing yourself, your family, your pets, and your friend.
Free will
Abu Hanifa was once teaching Islamic beliefs to his students. He was arguing and challenging the validity of some of the statements which had been proclaimed by his teacher sixth Imam, Imam Jafar Sadiq (as). Bahlool Dana happened to be present as well. Abu Hanifa proclaimed that he could not agree with the three understated statements as made by sixth Imam, Imam Jafar Sadiq (as).
The first one was that "Allah (SWT) can never be seen." According to Abu Hanifa it was impossible for a thing to exist and yet be invisible! The second thing that sixth Imam, Imam Jafar Sadiq (as) had stated was that "Shaitan (Satan) will be thrown in the inferno of Hell which will scorch him bitterly." Abu Hanifa argued: "How it was possible for fire to hurt 'fire', the fact that Shaitan (Satan) was created from fire itself!"
The third statement of sixth Imam, Imam Jafar Sadiq (as) was that "Man alone is responsible for his actions and Allah (SWT) - the most powerful - has nothing to do with his actions." "How is it possible, when Allah (SWT) alone guides the destiny of man without Whose will nothing can happen?" This was Abu Hanifa's third challenge.
As soon as the speaker, Abu Hanifa, had made these three criticisms against his teacher sixth Imam, Imam Jafar Sadiq (as), Bahlool Dana got up, took a piece of brick and aiming at Abu Hanifa, let it go and cracked Abu Hanifa head.
Bahlool Dana was caught and taken before the Judge for punishment. In his defense, he pleaded that he had done nothing else except reply to the three criticisms which Abu Hanifa had made against sixth Imam, Imam Jafar Sadiq (as).
The Judge asked him to explain as to how and why he chose to reply by hitting and injuring Abu Hanifa. Bahlool said, "This man claims that if Allah (SWT) is there, then he must be seen. He is now complaining of pain in his head due to the brick having hurt him. If the pain is definitely there, can he show me where it is? Well! Just as pain can be there without being seen Allah (SWT) also exists without being seen."
"Secondly, Abu Hanifa says that fire cannot burn fire. It is a fact that man is made out of clay and this brick with which I hit his head is also made out of clay, if clay can inflict pain and hurt clay, why can't fire do the same to fire?"
"The third thing Abu Hanifa says is that man is not responsible for his own actions but Allah (SWT) does all things. If this is so, then why does he want justice from you and why does he want me to be punished for hurting him? He might as well transfer the punishment to Allah (SWT) Who, according to him - is responsible for all the actions of man!"
Everyone in the court was stunned at this and Abu Hanifa was dumb founded - having nothing to say. So Bahlool Dana was released without any punishment.
Thus, while some Muslim sects believe that Allah (SWT) can be seen, perhaps on the Day of Judgement, the Shia Muslims say that Allah (SWT) is the creator of everything; He was not created and as such he has no body like us that can be seen. If we can still believe in unseen things like air, electricity and human soul, why can't we believe in the unseen Allah (SWT)?
If we are responsible for our actions and are to be punished or rewarded accordingly, then it is only fair and just that Allan (SWT) should not manipulate or compel us to do things but leave us alone to act the way we see it fit, and be answerable for those actions ourselves.
facebook.com/notes/14noor-%D9%84%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%83-%D9%8A%D8%A7-%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%AD%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B5%D8%B1-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B2%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86-/bahlool-dana-wisdom-proves-the-three-facts-to-abu-hanifa-belief-in-allah-tawhid/331938527717/
Read Aquinas's book against Averroes.
Admire Sapolsky interviews, surprise the media lack the interest in his contribution with basic appreciation and not just to act as devil advocate
What an illuminating discourse!
Slomofly wrote “You act. No matter why, you are responsible. It's all you.”
-----
If someone threatened to kill you if you don’t spray paint a swastika on a wall, why do you think all responsibility falls on you?
If you refuse to do it and you are shot, where did you get the idea that you are responsible for getting shot for refusing to engage in vandalism?
Or, using your logic(?), when a girl is raped ... it’s her fault?
Please explain. I’m sure everyone would love to hear your response.
If rape is not the girl's fault, then you have just confessed that your assertions are false. There is no logic that can save you when you set yourself on fire like that.
Thanks for the public immolation.
That was spectacular
Slomo,
No one cares about your context or logic.
What you have been asked for, repeatedly, is evidence.
What you have provided in response is ... zilch.
Slomo - go find yourself a nice Jesus site to hang out on.
You can torment Ghost Worshipers to your heart's content
with all your distraction techniques and logical fallacies.
But on science sites, you are only going to get shredded into tiny little pieces, like I have just done to you.
At this point, there isn't enough left of you to make Roadkill Soup.
Slomo,
I didn't bother to read your last 2 comments.
It is like talking to a wall ... that someone spray painted with shit.
It is obvious that you have zero answers for anything,
and have one of those arrogant, little-boy personalities
that refuse to ever let you admit that you are wrong.
I'm through dickin' around with you.
Slomo - you are Disssssssssssss-Misssssssssssssed.
NEXT!
Click "Sort by newest"
You have 1
“There are those who think that life has nothing left to chance
A host of holy horrors to direct our aimless dance …”
I was wondering when Sam and Robert where going to get together
Sam sucks but Robert is great
Lock up the Universe!
The Dorsal Lateral Pfc [01:59]
Charles Whitman [11:26]
Sundowner Syndrome [29:07]
Moral Mirage [31:01]
The Auschwitz Album [36:21]
What Do You To Happen in the Next 50 Years [41:07]
The Exodus [44:51]
Still lots of dispute re: efficacy (vs. placebo fx) of SSRI / meds for depression. Psychiatrist David Burns is a disbeliever/skeptic.
Some days it is hard to watch people act out what is essentially a macaque attack...and knowing I am no better....
poor sound .. shame ...
Someone, help, please - ive been watching Sam Harris for years, and i just dont understand this "we dont have freewill" thing. I can eat an apple,or a banana, something else, or nothing - i am free to chose, therefore i have freewill. I can stay in bed, or go to the park, i am free to chose, therefore i have freewill. Obviously my undertanding of the word must be to blame, but i dont underdtand how else the word "freewill" can be understood...?
You just listened to a detailed discussion by two people articulating how, from their perspective, (a) we do not have free will, and (b) of course it certainly feels like we do. Is the problem you are expressing really one of "understanding" their position, or is it the overwhelming feel of (b).
Basically free will is an illusion. Obviously most people feel like they have free will. It doesn't mean they actually have it.
It is an illusion like thinking a mirage in the desert and swearing it is a lake.
For example, was it your free will what type of home, parents, society, time period you were born in to? No. Yet these things decide what ice cream flavor you will choose.
1.25 helps...a bit.
Hey Sport Fans - Read this reply I just received and guess how old this guy is.
Here was his comment:
Slomofly wrote "So just shut up and I'll go away.
Keep babbling stupidity at me and I'll keep answering. Your choice"
So basically he just said "Stop it! Give me the last word or I will stay here forever!"
This gives you an idea of the mentality and maturity of Sam Harris' Fan Boys.
Now you know why they call them "Boys"
Slomo
You have been Dissssssssss-Missssssssssssed.
Exactly which part of "NEXT!"
do you NOT understand?
Hey Sports Fans - check the logic in Slomo's last comment.
He posts a comment and then claims I had the last word.
This guy needs to take his logic circuit board back to Radio Shack.
Hopefully, it's still under warranty.
This is the kind of crap you always get from Sam Harris Fan Boys.
They scream, whine, complain, cwy der widdle eyes out, and then ...
do it all over again.
Slomo - you have been Dissssssss-Missssssssed.
NEXT!
Slomo
You've been asked to leave nicely.
Yet, like a fart vapor in a small delicatessen ... you refuse to dissipate.
I'm going to have to turn you over to Big Mike.
He is a guy (or could be a girl) who many RUclipsrs go to when they have trolls like you, who stick to them like wet boogers that can't be wiped off.
He's a busy guy, so please be patient. He'll get around to you when he's free.
The notion of 'Free will' at the ultimate level being discussed here brings itself into a self-contradiction similar to the philosophical problem of 'absolute claim of relativism'. -- If Free will is ultimately a psychological illusion, then it also follows logically from that that we cannot decide if we believe/should act in accordance with the idea of free will or not. It is a meaningless proposition to try to convince people of any fact, any action or any attitude, since that very motivation is played out mechanically/chaotically and therefore cannot be changed. This leads to the collapse of morality as we know it. In some way, no matter how far we push towards reductive determinism we still can't escape the intuition that we are beings in some way transcendent to those very mechanics. (Not religious necessarily but in terms of language and the phenomenology of being capable of meta-reflection. There is no particular virtue in choosing to believe that you have no choice. Since that choice itself is not possible according to a completely rational view. Maybe it's something like a Xenon paradox.
Great comment! I agree. I think to take the reductionistic/deterministic seriously results in crippling cognitive dissonance. They have good points, but to claim to know for certain that our intuition for free will is completely false, is kind of arrogant. Where is the doubt? It could be that the reductionistic world view is partially correct, but is blind to genuinely creative phenomena that emerge from the substrate of an apparently deterministic physical reality. Sorry for wordiness but i think it makes sense.
See “Proof of Heaven: A Neurosurgeon's Journey into the Afterlife” (by Eben Alexander M.D.) for an alternative perspective.
the eye in the background is very distracting
>99% of our daily behavior is predetermined by habits to stimuli both external & internal, but there’s that
Slomofly wrote “There always has to be a mechanism that allows anything to work.”
-----
That assertion assumes that free will has no mechanism.
Who made that claim?
If you can’t point to someone who claimed that,
then you have built a Straw Man.
To defeat the Straw Man accusation,
simply provide us with a link to a scientist who said that.
Slomofly
Did you provide the name of a scientist who made the claim you asserted,
as you were asked?
No. You did not.
Straw Man confirmed.
Come on Slomo, keep your guard up. You are making this waaay too easy.
My, you are starting to lose your shit, aren't you?
If this is getting too rough for you Slomo, feel free to bail out and run as fast as your widdle wegs can carry you to your "Safe Space."
I don't need a Determinist (Calvinist) to tell me what scientists think.
"In general" may cut it in religion but it doesn't fly in a scientific debate.
Relying on your "Appeal to Authority" works when there is a scientific consensus, but is no different than religion in other cases, such as this one, where there is no consensus.
Harris and Sapolsky have the same amount of evidence as you do ...
ZERO.
That's why you are getting sliced and diced in front of everyone on RUclips. Instead of challenging those guys for evidence, you blindly accepted their bullshit, which is why you are now getting thrashed savagely back-and-forth like a gazelle caught in the jaws of a lion.
Advice: Don't blindly accept bullshit. Ask. Demand answers.
If you follow that advice (which you don't seem smart enough to do)
you will put others in the position that you now find yourself in;
and it will save you a ton of humiliation.
I knew it Sam Harris is a robot.
How do you explain criminals who hide their crimes? An uncontrollable impulse is blind. Choices are made to protect themselves from detection by the general public who will punish them if they are caught. Abusers hide their violence behind closed doors. It is like a hierarchy of options as in what they can get away with in the current situation. Like a child pushing their boundaries in a new environment or with new people. Yes there are too many factors from various disciplines that determine both the impulse and the choice to choose a safe environment to enact those inappropriate actions, but a choice is made. There is a level of choice and accountability, what determines that level may or may not include any level of actual agency is unknown.
As far as sensory input like smell I would agree that most humans are mentally lazy and choose to run on a type of autopilot but I do not agree that it is indicative of all humans. You are both examples of humans that are not afraid to pay attention and choose to attempt to modify your own behavior accordingly. I follow both of your works and enjoy the thought provoking well thought out ideas that you both present. I think about what you are saying and that is why I have questions.
majority of people are on drugs
You have no choice but to not do commit such crimes because you are not the one who was born and nurtured the ways were necessary to it. We can call it luck.
@@LateButGreat what you are stating is based on assumptions about my life which you know nothing about. You are also parroting popular social opinion. So enjoy letting popular opinion do your thinking for you.
You can not imagine that the question that I am posing is based on personal experience and years of research.
So frankly you can't offer me a real answer. All you can do is regurgitate what you have been told.
@@gigipah Are you saying free will skepticism is popular opinion? Really?
Look, what I said was not personal, in fact I'm saying that biological, cultural and social predispositions are as self-control ability matter of luck because we don't have ultimate control of anything. A behavior is an effect in a causal chain which extends back to long past times and deeper levels of nature. Causes are also effects and we are not free of physical laws.
But if I'm wrong you could talk about your research and show us how you came to be in the opposite direction all natural and neurosciences are going since last century.
@@LateButGreat so you are saying that the debate between nurture and nature has been settled?
Are you saying that everyone in a specific demographic are carbon copies of each other? There is divergence from house to house and individual to individual raised in the same neighborhood and same circumstances.
Muy bien.
Why are they in a cave?
Plato's Cave? 😅
Why are they speaking out of a barrel?
Lots of deniers. Science deniers.
Wow!!!
So criminality is inherited?
no but defiance is lol
sorry, could not listen, terrible audio
Sapolsky's contribution is so large and positive it makes Trump's presidency almost microscopic by comparison.
Goes to show what a circus life is. That a so called president of a large country is like a toddler mentally in comparison to Sapolsky.
shit audio
Use subtitles
Slomofly wrote “Unique Individual will is self evident.”
-----
You should know better than to use Christian Apologetic arguments in a scientific debate.
They might fly on Jesus videos - but not here.
(btw, “self evident” should be hyphenated and you only need to capitalize the first letter of the sentence)
Slomofly,
"self-evident" is not an answer (even when correctly punctuated).
If having your numerous spelling and grammatical errors exposed,
bothers you, you might want to consider developing the discipline to proofread your comments before posting them
and exposing yourself to ridicule in front of everyone on RUclips.
Advice: ESL at a fine high school near you.
Slomo
Nice try, but that is the same desperate ploy that all semi-literate commenters resort to when their lack of education and mental laziness are exposed for everyone to laugh at.
Advice: instead of digging your hole even deeper, try educating yourself and learning how to use the language properly.
That won't help you with your inability to explain why you blindly accept bullshit, but at least you won't look as ignorant while you are embarrassing yourself.
You obviously fancy yourself as a logical person.
Newsflash - so do religious nuts (just ask them).
But from all the agonizing comments I've suffered through I haven't seen any evidence that you possess enough logic skills to power a keychain flashlight.
Reversed
5 minutes--2nd trimester 'fetus'--like 26 weeks? responding to sounds? alive? born alive?
RS should definitely take mushrooms
Man is ruled by reason n beast by instinct!! Man has free will to choose between right n wrong ! 👍
What the fuck is this audio
Slomofly wrote “Free will is impossible and meaningless..”
-----
How do you know it is impossible?
Why do you think it is meaningless?
Why did you end your sentence with two periods?
Did you stutter?
Slomofly,
Brilliant response. It had just as many answers as your first reply ...
none
Another brilliant response.
As long as that makes sense to you, I guess that's all that matters.
The rest of us can just ignore it since you didn't really say anything coherent.
For all the Sports Fans, here are the 2 questions which you couldn't answer, and are doing your best to run away from:
How do you know it is impossible?
Why do you think it is meaningless?
You've had days. If you need weeks or months - take them.
Come back when you figure something out.
Your entire reply was based on the opening assertion "Will = conditioning."
Yet you offer nothing to back up your assertion
(that's why they call it an assertion).
Also, you are assuming your conclusion in your premise
(also known as "begging the question").
But no matter how many chances you are given, the one thing everyone is still waiting for is ... one stinkin bit of evidence.
I could cut/paste that into every religious argument on RUclips.
That's why you "Determinists" are nothing more than a Calvinist ...
without a Bible.
(btw, it's obvious you are making an effort to use correct spelling and grammar to relieve the rest of us from suffering through your comments. So you get points for the improvement)
TL;DNR
I clicked "Read More" and then closed it right back up.
People might be more inclined to read your comments
if you don't write your whole fucking life story.
But thanks for all the time and effort.
I'm sure it was interesting ... for you
Click "Sort by newest"
You have 1
Lapolsky super smart - but - he strikes out on free will. Just because we have biological & social tendencies - does not mean that we are unable to make a choice. Our consciousness empowers us to analyze the data coming in & make a move. Within that processing, our character is tested. and revealed The end result may be predictable - but - it is not pre-determined. If you will: within the percentage of unpredictability - there lies our ability to freely choose which course of action we take. We may not be 100% free - but - we are also not 100% enslaved either. We know where the plane is gonna land - but - during the flight - we cab freely choose the movie.
I was looking for Robert Sapolsky without Sam. Why does that right wing shill keep popping up EVERYWHERE?
"they" are using youtube to manipulate the weak minded
why is he right wing and a shill? they agree on everything.
I have known about Robert Sapolsky for at least 8 to 10 years longer that Sam Harris. While I don't always agree with Mr. Harris, I feel as if he has been unfairly denigrated for speaking his mind. There are many things he says that are very helpful and memorable. Sapolsky teaches at Stanford and was available at the Infinite Mind, at least that was the first place I heard him. He is a much in demand teacher and speaker and one can find a number of classes he teaches (quite edifying) on RUclips.
Sam is a liberal.
He's a fucking hate-monger! Keep stiring up that hatred in people, Sam!