https://razib.substack.com  This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib hosts three guests, Sarah Haider of A Special Place in Hell (and her own Substack), Shadi Hamid of the Brookings Institute (and Wisdom of the Crowds and his own Substack) and Murtaza Hussain of The Intercept (and his own Substack), for the second episode of the “Intellectual Brown Web” (here’s episode #1). Razib, Haider, Hamid and Hussain discuss the recent clashes between Muslim Americans and the LBTQIA+ movement. Was it inevitable? Was the “War on Terror” simply a two-decade interregnum interrupting the alignment of Muslims with social conservatives? And what is the place of Muslim intellectuals and politicians in the progressive movement going forward? Haider has written about how the Muslim-progressive alliance in American politics will unravel, and in this episode, she defends the contention that it naturally falls out of the theological propositions embedded within Islam. Hamid and Hussain in contrast argue that though the tensions are real, there is a possibility of a pluralistic solution, preserving fidelity to Islamic beliefs. All agree that the main issue is the challenge that progressive reworking of gender identity poses to traditional norms and traditional religion and that the Muslim immigrants in places like Hamtramck speak for many Americans in their confusion and sublimated hostility to the changes that they see in American society around them. Related: ‘A sense of betrayal’: liberal dismay as Muslim-led US city bans Pride flags, American Muslims are increasingly ready to find common ground with conservatives against the radical Left and CAIR demands apology from Montgomery County councilwoman over 'offensive' remarks.

<a href="https://razib.substack.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://razib.substack.com</a> This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib hosts three guests, Sarah Haider of A Special Place in Hell (and her own Substack), Shadi Hamid of the Brookings Institute (and Wisdom of the Crowds and his own Substack) and Murtaza Hussain of The Intercept (and his own Substack), for the second episode of the “Intellectual Brown Web” (here’s episode #1). Razib, Haider, Hamid and Hussain discuss the recent clashes between Muslim Americans and the LBTQIA+ movement. Was it inevitable? Was the “War on Terror” simply a two-decade interregnum interrupting the alignment of Muslims with social conservatives? And what is the place of Muslim intellectuals and politicians in the progressive movement going forward? Haider has written about how the Muslim-progressive alliance in American politics will unravel, and in this episode, she defends the contention that it naturally falls out of the theological propositions embedded within Islam. Hamid and Hussain in contrast argue that though the tensions are real, there is a possibility of a pluralistic solution, preserving fidelity to Islamic beliefs. All agree that the main issue is the challenge that progressive reworking of gender identity poses to traditional norms and traditional religion and that the Muslim immigrants in places like Hamtramck speak for many Americans in their confusion and sublimated hostility to the changes that they see in American society around them. Related: <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/17/hamtramck-michigan-muslim-council-lgbtq-pride-flags-banned" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">‘A sense of betrayal’: liberal dismay as Muslim-led US city bans Pride flags</a>, <a href="https://americanmind.org/salvo/meet-your-new-allies/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">American Muslims are increasingly ready to find common ground with conservatives against the radical Left</a> and <a href="https://www.fox5dc.com/news/cair-demands-apology-from-montgomery-county-councilwoman-over-offensive-remarks" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">CAIR demands apology from Montgomery County councilwoman over 'offensive' remarks</a>.

IBW Episode #2: Muslims vs. LGBTQIA+

https://razib.substack.com   This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. In the fall of 2022  Liz Truss was the UK's Prime Minister for 44 days. Her tenure was cut short by turmoil in the financial markets, as her attempts to roll out policies similar to the US’s 1980’s program of “Reaganomics” that combined lower taxes and higher deficits triggered panic and an intervention from the Bank of England. In retrospect, the problem was that the British elite periodically forgets that it’s the not US, it’s not the largest economy in the world and the pound sterling is not the world’s reserve currency. The US, unlike any other nation, can print money to escape its fiscal straijackets.  History hangs over Britain, and the shadows of the past always impinge upon the present. The UK still sees itself as an imperial nation, but today India has a larger economy than its one-time colonizer. The idea of the British Empire persisted deep into the 20th century, but the US was already the larger economy by the end of the 19th century. With World War I, the UK became a debtor to the US, and the power dynamic of the “special relationship” inverted as the mother country became the junior partner. Today Razib talks to Samuel Mcilhagga about Britain’s contemporary status as a post-imperial nation-state caught in economic stagnancy. They discuss his piece in Palladium, Britain Is Dead, which is a reflection of the structural and human realities of a fallen empire. Razib and Mcilhagga address the recent divergence between the UK and US from a point of rough parity in 2008, at the peak influence of high finance in developed economies, which placed the City of London in an advantageous position. Economic stagnation and high inflation have afflicted the UK since the great recession, and Britain has lagged niy only the US but fallen behind its continental peers, France and Germany. Mcilhagga attributed some of this to the British elite's inability to move beyond their role as imperial administrators and rentiers; he contrasts the productive and economically innovative American oligarchs to the complacent British upper class. Razib wonders about the strangeness of the difference between the two societies given their shared history, language and culture. Mcilhagga paints a picture of a small and prosperous professional class that benefited from globalization, and a broader populace that has been slowly ground into immiseration over the last two generations.

<a href="https://razib.substack.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://razib.substack.com</a> This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content. In the fall of 2022  Liz Truss was the UK's Prime Minister for 44 days. Her tenure was cut short by turmoil in the financial markets, as her attempts to roll out policies similar to the US’s 1980’s program of “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Reaganomics</a>” that combined lower taxes and higher deficits triggered panic and an <a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/truss-vs-the-bank-of-england-mini-budget/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">intervention from the Bank of England</a>. In retrospect, the problem was that the British elite periodically forgets that it’s the not US, it’s not the largest economy in the world and the pound sterling is not the world’s reserve currency. The US, unlike any other nation, can print money to escape its fiscal straijackets.  History hangs over Britain, and the shadows of the past always impinge upon the present. The UK still sees itself as an imperial nation, but today India has a larger economy than its one-time colonizer. The idea of the British Empire persisted deep into the 20th century, but the US was already the larger economy by the end of the 19th century. With World War I, the UK became a debtor to the US, and the power dynamic of the “special relationship” inverted as the mother country became the junior partner. Today Razib talks to <a href="https://twitter.com/McilhaggaSamuel?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Samuel Mcilhagga</a> about Britain’s contemporary status as a post-imperial nation-state caught in economic stagnancy. They discuss his piece in <a href="https://www.palladiummag.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Palladium</a>, <a href="https://www.palladiummag.com/2023/04/27/britain-is-dead/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Britain Is Dead</a>, which is a reflection of the structural and human realities of a fallen empire. Razib and Mcilhagga address the recent divergence between the UK and US from a point of rough parity in 2008, at the peak influence of high finance in developed economies, which placed the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London#Economy" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">City of London</a> in an advantageous position. Economic stagnation and high inflation have afflicted the UK since the great recession, and Britain has lagged niy only the US but fallen behind its continental peers, France and Germany. Mcilhagga attributed some of this to the British elite's inability to move beyond their role as imperial administrators and rentiers; he contrasts the productive and economically innovative American oligarchs to the complacent British upper class. Razib wonders about the strangeness of the difference between the two societies given their shared history, language and culture. Mcilhagga paints a picture of a small and prosperous professional class that benefited from globalization, and a broader populace that has been slowly ground into immiseration over the last two generations.

Samuel McIlhagga: the UK as a zombie nation

Mukherjee is a Paulson Policy Analyst at the Manhattan Institute and a Ph.D. student in American politics at Boston College, where her dissertation will focus on affirmative action. Razib asks Mukherjee to discuss the origin of affirmative action as it is practiced in the US today, starting with the Bakke decision in 1978, and then moving on to Grutter vs. Bollinger in 2003. She then moves to the details of the current cases, in particular Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. President &amp; Fellows of Harvard College, where the plaintiffs assert that Harvard University discriminates against Asian Americans in admissions, and engages in “racial balancing.” Razib and Mukherjee then explore the implications of the decision. Razib wonders about the implication for Harvard in particular, which is, to great extent, the finishing school of the American ruling class. Is Harvard’s mission sustainable if 40% of the student body is Asian American? Mukherjee points out that these demographic trends, the rise of Asian Americans proportionally and the decline of historically represented groups, have been occurring despite affirmative action, for example, the decline of Jewish Americans in the Ivy League over the last generation. Additionally, both Razib and Mukherjee agree universities are certain to engage in both evasion and massive resistance to the ruling. Mukherjee argues that the current moves against standardized testing anticipate the program of evasion that we can expect in the future, where holistic admissions can allow the administrators’ preferences to continue.

Mukherjee is a <a href="https://manhattan.institute/person/renu-mukherjee" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Paulson Policy Analyst at the Manhattan Institute</a> and a Ph.D. student in American politics at Boston College, where her dissertation will focus on affirmative action. Razib asks Mukherjee to discuss the origin of affirmative action as it is practiced in the US today, starting with the <a href="https://www.britannica.com/event/Bakke-decision" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Bakke</a> decision in 1978, and then moving on to <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-241.ZS.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Grutter vs. Bollinger</a> in 2003. She then moves to the details of the current cases, in particular <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/students-for-fair-admissions-inc-v-president-fellows-of-harvard-college/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. President &amp; Fellows of Harvard College</a>, where the plaintiffs assert that Harvard University discriminates against Asian Americans in admissions, and engages in “racial balancing.” Razib and Mukherjee then explore the implications of the decision. Razib wonders about the implication for Harvard in particular, which is, to great extent, the finishing school of the American ruling class. Is Harvard’s mission sustainable if 40% of the student body is Asian American? Mukherjee points out that these demographic trends, the rise of Asian Americans proportionally and the decline of historically represented groups, have been occurring despite affirmative action, for example, the decline of Jewish Americans in the Ivy League <a href="https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/trading-places" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">over the last generation</a>. Additionally, both Razib and Mukherjee agree universities are certain to engage in both evasion and <a href="https://encyclopediavirginia.org/entries/massive-resistance/#:~:text=Massive%20Resistance%20was%20a%20policy,of%20Education%20of%20Topeka%2C%20Kansas." rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">massive resistance</a> to the ruling. Mukherjee argues that the current moves against standardized testing anticipate the program of evasion that we can expect in the future, where holistic admissions can allow the administrators’ preferences to continue.

Renu Mukherjee: Affirmative Action's End

Elizabeth Jones

In June 1991, The New York Times published a piece titled “Scientists Study Ancient DNA for Glimpses of Past Worlds.” Published a year after Michael Crichton’s 1990 novel Jurassic Park, on which the 1993 blockbuster would be based, the article opens “Will it one day become possible to breed a living dinosaur from genes preserved in fossils?” More than 30 years on, we obviously have not bred a living dinosaur, nor come even close. But the early 1990’s kicked off the first age of ancient DNA with massive optimism, stimulated by the spread of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technology, which allowed the amplification of minute amounts of genetic material. I  remember this particular article because an extract was passed around my 8th-grade science class. Today I talk to Dr. Elizabeth Jones, author of Ancient DNA: The Making of a Celebrity Science, about the excitement in paleogenetics in the 1990s, its subsequent retrenchment as a field, and the prompt renaissance in the late 2000’s under the leadership of Svante Pääbo and Eske Willerslev.  Jones first articulates her idea of what “celebrity science” is. Rather than science being driven by an individual, like Albert Einstein or James Watson, she argues that fields of science itself can become a celebrity due to strong public interest. This was clearly true in the 1990’s, with the frequent popular press stories about dinosaur DNA and the tie-in to Jurassic Park, and in the late 2000’s and down to the present, culminating in Pääbo being awarded a Nobel Prize. In her book, Jones views celebrity science as a wholly positive development, allowing for a full exploration of the possibilities of a field, and putting the spotlight on possible problems so that science’s self-correction mechanisms can kick-in. This was certainly true with the first “hype cycle” of ancient DNA, when it turned out that many of the specific results were actually the result of modern contamination. Jones outlines how in fact it was Pääbo and his collaborators who were the skeptics demanding stricter methods and frameworks before publication. Ancient DNA then recounts how a second hype cycle was triggered by genomic sequencing’s integration into paleogenetics, opening up an avenue to obtain the whole genomes of Neanderthals and other species. Jones’ Ph.D. work, which led to Ancient DNA, was just concluded in 2015. But she recalls the mad last-second scramble to update the manuscript at the last second because of this last half a decade’s flood of results. They consider the field’s future possibilities, and finally the prospects for genuine retrieval of biological material from actual dinosaurs, the original ambition in the 1990’s

In June 1991, The New York Times published a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1991/06/25/science/scientists-study-ancient-dna-for-glimpses-of-past-worlds.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">piece</a> titled “Scientists Study Ancient DNA for Glimpses of Past Worlds.” Published a year after Michael Crichton’s 1990 novel <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurassic_Park_(novel)" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Jurassic Park</a>, on which the 1993 blockbuster would be based, the article opens “Will it one day become possible to breed a living dinosaur from genes preserved in fossils?” More than 30 years on, we obviously have not bred a living dinosaur, nor come even close. But the early 1990’s kicked off the first age of ancient DNA with massive optimism, stimulated by the spread of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technology, which allowed the amplification of minute amounts of genetic material. I  remember this particular article because an extract was passed around my 8th-grade science class. Today I talk to <a href="https://research.ncsu.edu/ges/event/ges-colloquium-2022-09-13/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Dr. Elizabeth Jones</a>, author of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B09PMWM7DZ/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Ancient DNA: The Making of a Celebrity Science</a>, about the excitement in paleogenetics in the 1990s, its subsequent retrenchment as a field, and the prompt renaissance in the late 2000’s under the leadership of Svante Pääbo and Eske Willerslev.  Jones first articulates her idea of what “celebrity science” is. Rather than science being driven by an individual, like Albert Einstein or James Watson, she argues that fields of science itself can become a celebrity due to strong public interest. This was clearly true in the 1990’s, with the frequent popular press stories about dinosaur DNA and the tie-in to Jurassic Park, and in the late 2000’s and down to the present, culminating in Pääbo being awarded a Nobel Prize. In her book, Jones views celebrity science as a wholly positive development, allowing for a full exploration of the possibilities of a field, and putting the spotlight on possible problems so that science’s self-correction mechanisms can kick-in. This was certainly true with the first “hype cycle” of ancient DNA, when it turned out that many of the specific results were actually the result of modern contamination. Jones outlines how in fact it was Pääbo and his collaborators who were the skeptics demanding stricter methods and frameworks before publication. <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B09PMWM7DZ/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Ancient DNA</a> then recounts how a second hype cycle was triggered by genomic sequencing’s integration into paleogenetics, opening up an avenue to obtain the whole genomes of Neanderthals and other species. Jones’ Ph.D. work, which led to <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B09PMWM7DZ/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Ancient DNA</a>, was just concluded in 2015. But she recalls the mad last-second scramble to update the manuscript at the last second because of this last half a decade’s flood of results. They consider the field’s future possibilities, and finally the prospects for genuine retrieval of biological material from actual dinosaurs, the original ambition in the 1990’s

Elizabeth Jones: ancient DNA as "celebrity science"

Lee Fang

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks to journalist Lee Fang. Formerly an investigative reporter at The Intercept and a contributing writer at The Nation, Fang began his journalism career at ThinkProgress. As an undergraduate, Fang was president of the University of Maryland College Democrats, and interned for Democratic representatives Stephanie Tubbs Jones and Steny Hoyer. He was also the first intern for the progressive media watchdog group Media Matters for America. Today Fang publishes his findings on his eponymous Substack. Razib asks Fang what it’s like to do investigative journalism without institutional support. A common assertion in relation to the decline of the mainstream media is that only organizations with deep pockets and long time horizons can fund such work, but Fang has already exposed Pierre Omidyar’s support for defunding the police while personally investing in private security companies, discovered that a major California diversity consultant was defrauding the state and found that tech companies put in mass applications for lower-paid H1-B hires after mass layoffs of mostly Americans. Fang attests to there being a surfeit of public documents there for the taking; what's needed is just the will and determination to dig. Razib and Fang also discuss what it’s like to start out in progressive journalism, but now find yourself in an ideological space without a clear partisan valence. Though Fang clearly comes out of the Left, some of his findings, like that Pfizer funded lobbying groups who pushed vaccine mandates, are now more palatable to the Right. He is also unafraid to take on establishment progressive pundits, like Mehdi Hassan, whom Fang systematically exposed as having a history of engaging in personal attacks based on accusations of racism as well as engaging in plagiarism.

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks to journalist <a href="https://www.leefang.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Lee Fang</a>. Formerly an investigative reporter at <a href="https://theintercept.com/staff/leefang/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Intercept</a> and a contributing writer at <a href="https://www.thenation.com/authors/lee-fang/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Nation</a>, Fang began his journalism career at <a href="https://archive.thinkprogress.org/author/leefang/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">ThinkProgress</a>. As an undergraduate, Fang was president of the University of Maryland College Democrats, and interned for Democratic representatives Stephanie Tubbs Jones and Steny Hoyer. He was also the first intern for the progressive media watchdog group Media Matters for America. Today Fang publishes his findings on his <a href="https://www.leefang.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">eponymous Substack</a>. Razib asks Fang what it’s like to do investigative journalism without institutional support. A common assertion in relation to the decline of the mainstream media is that only organizations with deep pockets and long time horizons can fund such work, but Fang has already <a href="https://www.leefang.com/p/billionaire-funding-abolish-the-police" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">exposed</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Omidyar" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Pierre Omidyar</a>’s support for defunding the police while personally investing in private security companies, discovered that a major California diversity consultant was <a href="https://www.leefang.com/p/top-asian-diversity-consultant-accused" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">defrauding the state</a> and found that tech companies <a href="https://www.leefang.com/p/big-tech-resumed-hiring-foreign-workers" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">put in mass applications for lower-paid H1-B hires after mass layoffs of mostly Americans</a>. Fang attests to there being a surfeit of public documents there for the taking; what's needed is just the will and determination to dig. Razib and Fang also discuss what it’s like to start out in progressive journalism, but now find yourself in an ideological space without a clear partisan valence. Though Fang clearly comes out of the Left, some of his findings, like that <a href="https://www.leefang.com/p/pfizer-quietly-financed-groups-lobbying" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Pfizer funded lobbying groups who pushed vaccine mandates</a>, are now more palatable to the Right. He is also unafraid to take on establishment progressive pundits, like <a href="https://www.leefang.com/p/msnbcs-mehdi-hasan-gets-basic-facts" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Mehdi Hassan</a>, whom Fang systematically exposed as having a history of engaging in personal attacks based on accusations of racism as well as engaging in <a href="https://www.leefang.com/p/mehdi-hasan-plagiarized-pro-spanking" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">plagiarism</a>.

Lee Fang: investigative journalism and investigating journalists

Ross Douthat

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib hosts Ross Douthat, author of Bad Religion: How We Became a Nation of Heretics, Privilege: Harvard and the Education of the Ruling Class, Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream, The Deep Places: A Memoir of Illness and Discovery and The Decadent Society: How We Became the Victims of Our Own Success. A columnist at The New York Times, often on political and social topics, Douthat also reviews movies for National Review. Today Razib talks to him about a topic that is a bit off the beaten path: why is genre fiction, and fantasy literature, still relevant today, and how, in the last generation, did it break out of its cultural ghetto? First, Douthat addresses the massive role that J. R. R. Tolkien’s works have had on the field, how most of modern fantasy is either an imitation of his works or a response to them, and the creative limitations that that circumstance imposes. Razib and Douthat then discuss the various shifts in the genre style over the last 20 years, toward a more gritty and morally ambiguous style exemplified by George R. R. Martin, and the cultural breakthrough of Game of Thrones in the 2010’s. Douthat avers that in some ways genre has come into its own, with the decline in the cultural status of realistic fiction and drama, and the ascension of “comic book movies.” While Razib believes that Marvel films are arguably fantasy, Douthat disagrees, believing their contemporary settings disqualify them. They also address whether fantasy is actually simply the channeling of premodern narrative styles that go back to the Epic of Gilgamesh or the Iliad. They address the somewhat exceptional success of Game of Thrones on television and the failure of Amazon’s Rings of Power and The Wheel of Time. Finally, Douthat talks about his unpublished fantasy novel, The Falcon’s Children. 

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib hosts <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Douthat" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Ross Douthat</a>, author of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/143917833X/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Bad Religion: How We Became a Nation of Heretics</a>,<a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1401307558/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"> Privilege: Harvard and the Education of the Ruling Class</a>, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/143917833X/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream</a>, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0593237366/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Deep Places: A Memoir of Illness and Discovery</a> and <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1476785244/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Decadent Society: How We Became the Victims of Our Own Success</a>. A columnist at <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/column/ross-douthat" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The New York Times</a>, often on political and social topics, Douthat also reviews movies for <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/author/ross-douthat/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">National Review</a>. Today Razib talks to him about a topic that is a bit off the beaten path: why is genre fiction, and fantasy literature, still relevant today, and how, in the last generation, did it break out of its cultural ghetto? First, Douthat addresses the massive role that J. R. R. Tolkien’s works have had on the field, how most of modern fantasy is either an imitation of his works or a response to them, and the creative limitations that that circumstance imposes. Razib and Douthat then discuss the various shifts in the genre style over the last 20 years, toward a more gritty and morally ambiguous style exemplified by George R. R. Martin, and the cultural breakthrough of Game of Thrones in the 2010’s. Douthat avers that in some ways genre has come into its own, with the decline in the cultural status of realistic fiction and drama, and the ascension of “comic book movies.” While Razib believes that Marvel films are arguably fantasy, Douthat disagrees, believing their contemporary settings disqualify them. They also address whether fantasy is actually simply the channeling of premodern narrative styles that go back to the Epic of Gilgamesh or the Iliad. They address the somewhat exceptional success of Game of Thrones on television and the failure of Amazon’s Rings of Power and The Wheel of Time. Finally, Douthat talks about his unpublished fantasy novel, <a href="https://douthat.substack.com/p/the-falcons-children" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Falcon’s Children</a>.

Ross Douthat: fantasy and the literary imagination

Samo Burja

On this week’s Unsupervised Learning Razib welcomes back a favorite repeat guest, Samo Burja, to discuss matters future, present and past. Burja founded the consulting firm Bismarck Analysis and developed the “great founder theory.” He contributes to Palladium Magazine, Asia Times, City Journal, and The National Interest. Burja’s first appearance on the podcast, recorded in the fall of 2020, spiraled into a long discussion on the Chinese past and future, and Razib follows up to find out where he thinks the Peoples’ Republic is in 2023 and where it will go in the near future. Though Burja acknowledges that bullishness on Chinese power has abated, and Xi’s leadership has left much to be desired in its outcomes during the tail end of the COVID-19 pandemic, he asserts that China’s capacity as a manufacturing power cannot be underestimated. Even if the vision of a Chinese hyperpower that prevailed at the end of the 2010’s has receded, Bujra foresees a multipolar world. Jumping to the present, Razib also revisits the Russia-Ukraine war, a topic they discussed in a subsequent podcast last year. Burja notes that the rise of Ukrainian nationalism over the last few years is a somewhat unexpected and novel development, and Putin clearly made a misstep. That being said, Razib and Burja agree that the war seems likely to drag on indefinitely as neither participant has a plausible clean exit strategy. Finally, the second half of the conversation jumps back to the past, as they discuss a piece Burja co-authored for Palladium two years ago, Why Civilization Is Older Than We Thought. Here Burja believes he is now on firmer ground than in 2021, as new findings even more ancient than Göbekli Tepe have since been uncovered. Razib and Burja discuss the difficulty of navigating between the excessive conservatism of archaeological science and the flights of fantasy that some popularizers like Graham Hancock indulge in when it comes to the idea of “Ice Age civilizations.” All that being said, Burja believes it is not outside of the realm of possibility that a civilization as complex as ancient Egypt may have existed during the Ice Age.

On this week’s Unsupervised Learning Razib welcomes back a favorite repeat guest, <a href="https://samoburja.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Samo Burja</a>, to discuss matters future, present and past. Burja founded the consulting firm <a href="https://www.bismarckanalysis.com/#/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Bismarck Analysis</a> and developed the “<a href="https://samoburja.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Great_Founder_Theory_by_Samo_Burja_2020_Manuscript.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">great founder theory</a>.” He contributes to <a href="https://www.palladiummag.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Palladium Magazine</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asia_Times" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Asia Times</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Journal" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">City Journal</a>, and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_National_Interest" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The National Interest</a>. Burja’s first appearance on the <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/samo-burja-on-social-technology-china-and-the/id1542136715?i=1000504689042" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">podcast</a>, recorded in the fall of 2020, spiraled into a long discussion on the Chinese past and future, and Razib follows up to find out where he thinks the Peoples’ Republic is in 2023 and where it will go in the near future. Though Burja acknowledges that bullishness on Chinese power has abated, and Xi’s leadership has left much to be desired in its outcomes during the tail end of the COVID-19 pandemic, he asserts that China’s capacity as a manufacturing power cannot be underestimated. Even if the vision of a Chinese hyperpower that prevailed at the end of the 2010’s has receded, Bujra foresees a multipolar world. Jumping to the present, Razib also revisits the Russia-Ukraine war, a topic they discussed in a subsequent podcast <a href="https://razib.substack.com/p/russia-invades-ukraine-and-ends-globalization#details" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">last year</a>. Burja notes that the rise of Ukrainian nationalism over the last few years is a somewhat unexpected and novel development, and Putin clearly made a misstep. That being said, Razib and Burja agree that the war seems likely to drag on indefinitely as neither participant has a plausible clean exit strategy. Finally, the second half of the conversation jumps back to the past, as they discuss a piece Burja co-authored for Palladium two years ago, <a href="https://www.palladiummag.com/2023/03/07/our-knowledge-of-history-decays-over-time/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Why Civilization Is Older Than We Thought</a>. Here Burja believes he is now on firmer ground than in 2021, as new findings even more ancient than Göbekli Tepe have since been uncovered. Razib and Burja discuss the difficulty of navigating between the excessive conservatism of archaeological science and the flights of fantasy that some popularizers like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Hancock#Pseudoarchaeology" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Graham Hancock </a>indulge in when it comes to the idea of “Ice Age civilizations.” All that being said, Burja believes it is not outside of the realm of possibility that a civilization as complex as ancient Egypt may have existed during the Ice Age.

Samo Burja: China's future, Russia's present and archaeology's past

In 1968, Stanford ecologist Paul R. Ehrlich, published The Population Bomb, arguing that rapid growth in human numbers would result in environmental catastrophe and widespread famine. Overall the dire predictions of The Population Bomb did not come to pass, with the Green Revolution staving off the specter of mass starvation. With eight billion people today, the world population has doubled since 1970, and global TFR (totality fertility rate) is now 2.4, down from 4.5 in 1970. When it comes to our planet's most populous nations, as of 2019, China and the U.S. had sub-replacement fertility levels at 1.69 and 1.71 respectively, while India hovered near the replacement rate at 2.2, and Indonesia slightly surpassed it with a TFR of 2.32. A 2020 Lancet study projected that the global population could peak in 2064 at around 9.7 billion, then declining to about 8.8 billion by the end of the century, largely due to decreasing fertility rates. On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib talks to Lillian Tara, executive director of Pronatalist.org, an organization devoted to reversing the trend toward sub-replacement fertility worldwide as nations develop. Tara is notable as the youngest guest on Unsupervised Learning, born after 9/11, she is focused on the future with an awareness of the past. A recent graduate of the University of Virginia in politics and policy, set to matriculate  at Harvard University in the fall of 2023 for her master's, Tara believes that humans are a vital resource and that a future with ever-dwindling populations is a future of ever-dwindling possibilities. Following in the path of Julian Simon, an economist who was Ehrlich’s great nemesis in the 1970’s and 1980’s, Tara outlines the anti-Malthusian economic case that far from capsizing "lifeboat earth," innovation and technology will lift all boats over time. Though Pronatalist.org promotes a change in the culture when it comes to expectations about reproduction, Tara is also an enthusiast of cutting-edge next-generation reproductive technology, from surrogacy to in vitro fertilization. She is particularly focused on how to incentivize high-status individuals to have more children. Tarra believes that cultural leaders and influencers set the norms for society as a whole and that it is critical to make having larger families cool and an aspiration, rather than the practices of marginal religious sects.

In 1968, Stanford ecologist Paul R. Ehrlich, published The Population Bomb, arguing that rapid growth in human numbers would result in environmental catastrophe and widespread famine. Overall the dire predictions of The Population Bomb did not come to pass, with the Green Revolution staving off the specter of mass starvation. With eight billion people today, the world population has doubled since 1970, and global TFR (totality fertility rate) is now 2.4, down from 4.5 in 1970. When it comes to our planet's most populous nations, as of 2019, China and the U.S. had sub-replacement fertility levels at 1.69 and 1.71 respectively, while India hovered near the replacement rate at 2.2, and Indonesia slightly surpassed it with a TFR of 2.32. A 2020 Lancet study projected that the global population could peak in 2064 at around 9.7 billion, then declining to about 8.8 billion by the end of the century, largely due to decreasing fertility rates. On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib talks to <a href="https://twitter.com/OptimismMommy" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Lillian Tara</a>, executive director of <a href="https://pronatalist.org/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Pronatalist.org</a>, an organization devoted to reversing the trend toward sub-replacement fertility worldwide as nations develop. Tara is notable as the youngest guest on Unsupervised Learning, born after 9/11, she is focused on the future with an awareness of the past. A recent graduate of the University of Virginia in politics and policy, set to matriculate  at Harvard University in the fall of 2023 for her master's, Tara believes that humans are a vital resource and that a future with ever-dwindling populations is a future of ever-dwindling possibilities. Following in the path of Julian Simon, an economist who was Ehrlich’s great nemesis in the 1970’s and 1980’s, Tara outlines the anti-Malthusian economic case that far from capsizing "lifeboat earth," innovation and technology will lift all boats over time. Though <a href="https://pronatalist.org/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Pronatalist.org</a> promotes a change in the culture when it comes to expectations about reproduction, Tara is also an enthusiast of cutting-edge next-generation reproductive technology, from surrogacy to in vitro fertilization. She is particularly focused on how to incentivize high-status individuals to have more children. Tarra believes that cultural leaders and influencers set the norms for society as a whole and that it is critical to make having larger families cool and an aspiration, rather than the practices of marginal religious sects.

Lillian Tara: more babies for a better world

Timothy B. Lee

A few years ago now, Razib talked to Tim Lee about his new Substack Full Stack Economics, which featured deep dives into economic issues (as well as some on-the-ground-reporting, like when he drove Lyft to get a feel for its economics). But recently, Lee decided to put Full Stack Economics on pause to focus on a new Substack: Understanding AI. Artificial intelligence is hot right now, but Lee covered tech for a decade for Washington Post, Ars Technica, and Vox.com, and has a master’s degree in computer science from Princeton, so Razib was curious about what he’s learned. Recently two pieces seem to illustrate the alternative faces of generative AI and LLMs, I cloned my voice with AI and my mother couldn’t tell the difference and Why I'm not worried about AI causing mass unemployment. On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib and Lee discuss the impact of artificial intelligence, the good, bad and trivial. Lee makes the case that AI might be like the internet, transforming narrow aspects of knowledge-work and enabling a richer culture, but without clear revolutionary implications for the economy. His thesis hinges on the fact that AI cannot operate in the material world due to the primitive state of robotics, though Razib wonders if this barrier too might fall in the near future. Overall, Lee suggests that the AI “hype machine” is being driven by the fact that information workers who set the terms of public discussion are the ones likely to be most impacted; waiters, plumbers and nurses, in contrast, will be just fine. Razib and Lee also discuss the field of existential risk analysis. Lee found Nick Bostrom’s Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies unimpressive due to the fiat assumption that fields like nanotechnology could be manipulated by AI when nanotechnology itself is in quite a primitive state. Overall, Lee’s perception is that the “doomers” in the AI punditry field tend to be science fiction writers who are better at spinning narratives than doing analysis.

A few years ago now, Razib talked to <a href="https://twitter.com/binarybits?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Tim Lee</a> about his new Substack <a href="https://razib.substack.com/p/timothy-b-lee-reporting-on-the-intersection#details" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Full Stack Economics</a>, which featured deep dives into economic issues (as well as some on-the-ground-reporting, like when <a href="https://www.fullstackeconomics.com/p/i-drove-for-lyft-for-a-week-and-learned" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">he drove</a> Lyft to get a feel for its economics). But recently, Lee decided to put <a href="https://razib.substack.com/p/timothy-b-lee-reporting-on-the-intersection#details" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Full Stack Economics</a> on pause to focus on a new Substack: <a href="https://www.understandingai.org/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Understanding AI</a>. Artificial intelligence is hot right now, but Lee covered tech for a decade for <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/06/?arc404=true" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Washington Post</a>, <a href="https://arstechnica.com/author/timlee/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Ars Technica</a>, and <a href="https://www.vox.com/authors/timothy-b-lee" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Vox.com</a>, and has a master’s degree in computer science from Princeton, so Razib was curious about what he’s learned. Recently two pieces seem to illustrate the alternative faces of generative AI and LLMs, <a href="https://www.understandingai.org/p/i-cloned-my-voice-with-ai-and-my" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">I cloned my voice with AI and my mother couldn’t tell the difference</a> and <a href="https://www.understandingai.org/p/software-didnt-eat-the-world" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Why I'm not worried about AI causing mass unemployment</a>. On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib and Lee discuss the impact of artificial intelligence, the good, bad and trivial. Lee makes the case that AI might be like the internet, transforming narrow aspects of knowledge-work and enabling a richer culture, but without clear revolutionary implications for the economy. His thesis hinges on the fact that AI cannot operate in the material world due to the primitive state of robotics, though Razib wonders if this barrier too might fall in the near future. Overall, Lee suggests that the AI “hype machine” is being driven by the fact that information workers who set the terms of public discussion are the ones likely to be most impacted; waiters, plumbers and nurses, in contrast, will be just fine. Razib and Lee also discuss the field of existential risk analysis. Lee found Nick Bostrom’s<a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00LOOCGB2/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"> Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies</a> unimpressive due to the fiat assumption that fields like nanotechnology could be manipulated by AI when nanotechnology itself is in quite a primitive state. Overall, Lee’s perception is that the “doomers” in the AI punditry field tend to be science fiction writers who are better at spinning narratives than doing analysis.

Timothy B. Lee: don't rage against the machine

Recently, scientists discovered that a two-year mega-drought beginning in 1198 BC hastened the Hittite Empire’s collapse. The finding sheds new light on the history of the decades around 1200 BC, adding specificity to the timing and cause for the period’s social and political chaos. Today on the Unsupervised Learning podcast Razib discusses the “Bronze Age Collapse,” the end of the first globalized world. This collapse marked the end of a multi-century period when the Near East’s empires and states had matured to the point where a common system of diplomacy and trade could emerge, centering on the three major foci of Egypt, Mesopotamia and Anatolia, but including smaller states like the kingdoms of Greece and the Levant. The end of this world was so sharp and abrupt that many regions, like Greece, lost their memory of these centuries, plunging into a “Dark Age,” when urban life disappeared and life regressed back to a Neolithic scale. The Hittites were entirely forgotten, recalled only in a few mentions in the Bible. Razib discusses whether these sorts of shifts are inevitable in any sufficiently complex social system, or whether external shocks like climate change are necessary. What can the end of the Bronze Age tell us about other civilizational collapses?

Recently, scientists <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05693-y" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">discovered</a> that a two-year mega-drought beginning in 1198 BC hastened the Hittite Empire’s collapse. The finding sheds new light on the history of the decades around 1200 BC, adding specificity to the timing and cause for the period’s social and political chaos. Today on the Unsupervised Learning podcast Razib discusses the “Bronze Age Collapse,” the end of the first globalized world. This collapse marked the end of a multi-century period when the Near East’s empires and states had matured to the point where a common system of diplomacy and trade could emerge, centering on the three major foci of Egypt, Mesopotamia and Anatolia, but including smaller states like the kingdoms of Greece and the Levant. The end of this world was so sharp and abrupt that many regions, like Greece, lost their memory of these centuries, plunging into a “Dark Age,” when urban life disappeared and life regressed back to a Neolithic scale. The Hittites were entirely forgotten, recalled only in a few mentions in the Bible. Razib discusses whether these sorts of shifts are inevitable in any sufficiently complex social system, or whether external shocks like climate change are necessary. What can the end of the Bronze Age tell us about other civilizational collapses?

The collapse of the Bronze Age civilization

Razib Khan engages a diverse array of thinkers on all topics under the sun. Genetics, history, and politics. See: http://razib.substack.com/

Peter Nimitz

On this episode of the Unsupervised Learning podcast, Razib talks to Peter Nimitz, the author behind the Nemets Substack, which explores topics as diverse as the 2014 Donbass War and the likelihood of Eurasian migration into Chad thousands of years ago. Razib and Nimitz walk through his recent post, the Seven Ages of Western Eurasia: A brief outline of the 11,700 years from the Anatolian Farmers to the Present. In the piece, he explores the changes that Europe and West Asia have undergone since the end of the last Ice Age, including the rise and fall of pre-literate civilizations before written history, and the recurrent social and economic collapses from which humans have had to rebuild. Razib and Nimitz have similar interests, but where Razib focuses more on genetic relationships, Nimitz tends to dive deep into archaeology, supplementing his understanding of the migration of peoples with paleogenetics. They also discuss the proto-civilizations of the Ice Age, including nascent farming communities that might date to over 20,000 years ago. The conversation repeatedly circles back to the theme that paleogenetics has had a transformative effect on interpreting archaeological sites and our understanding of the migrations of past peoples. https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content.

On this episode of the Unsupervised Learning podcast, Razib talks to Peter Nimitz, the author behind the Nemets Substack, which explores topics as diverse as the 2014 Donbass War and the likelihood of Eurasian migration into Chad thousands of years ago. Razib and Nimitz walk through his recent post, the Seven Ages of Western Eurasia: A brief outline of the 11,700 years from the Anatolian Farmers to the Present. In the piece, he explores the changes that Europe and West Asia have undergone since the end of the last Ice Age, including the rise and fall of pre-literate civilizations before written history, and the recurrent social and economic collapses from which humans have had to rebuild. Razib and Nimitz have similar interests, but where Razib focuses more on genetic relationships, Nimitz tends to dive deep into archaeology, supplementing his understanding of the migration of peoples with paleogenetics. They also discuss the proto-civilizations of the Ice Age, including nascent farming communities that might date to over 20,000 years ago. The conversation repeatedly circles back to the theme that paleogenetics has had a transformative effect on interpreting archaeological sites and our understanding of the migrations of past peoples. <a href="https://razib.substack.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://razib.substack.com</a> This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content.

Peter Nimitz: Seven Ages of Western Eurasia

Alex Feinberg

Alex Feinberg is anything but your typical trainer. An economics graduate from Vanderbilt, Feinberg willed himself to become a professional baseball player through focus and hard work and then talked his way into a sales and business development job at Google. In the late 2010’s Feinberg moved into the crypto space, but found that one precondition to success was having a large Twitter following. So he pivoted and focused on growing his Twitter following, and noticed that his lifestyle tweets, and images of him highlighting his fitness and dietary regime, were the ones that gained traction and got him followers. Today Razib talks to Feinberg about how he helps people optimize their health, and how that might apply to other aspects of their life, like getting a raise at work through changing your presentation and delivery. Feinberg explains his methods rely on intuition and try to leverage your cognitive biases, as opposed to working against them. Razib probes whether these methods are appropriate for everyone; perhaps there are cognitive and physical parameters that help in terms of optimization. Feinberg admits his techniques are more effective for males than females. For example, it is much easier to gain muscle mass by simply changing nutrition and lifting if you have high testosterone. The Feinberg phenotype is not accessible to all. Feinberg and Razib also talk about his experiences in the corporate world, in particular at Google. Feinberg claims that in 2011 Google was a much more libertarian company than it was by the time he left in 2018. In particular, Feinberg noticed that many executives and senior managers began to lie and willfully mislead employees in order to scale the corporate ladder. These experiences helped convince him that the corporate world was not for him, and over the last five years, his focus has been on developing independent revenue streams through his coaching, training and books.

<a href="https://www.instagram.com/alexfeinberg1/?hl=en" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Alex Feinberg</a> is anything but your typical trainer. An economics graduate from Vanderbilt, Feinberg willed himself to become a professional baseball player through focus and hard work and then talked his way into a sales and business development job at Google. In the late 2010’s Feinberg moved into the crypto space, but found that one precondition to success was having a large Twitter following. So he pivoted and focused on growing his <a href="https://twitter.com/alexfeinberg1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Twitter</a> following, and noticed that his lifestyle tweets, and images of him highlighting his fitness and dietary regime, were the ones that gained traction and got him followers. Today Razib talks to Feinberg about how he helps people optimize their health, and how that might apply to other aspects of their life, like getting a raise at work through changing your presentation and delivery. Feinberg explains his methods rely on intuition and try to leverage your cognitive biases, as opposed to working against them. Razib probes whether these methods are appropriate for everyone; perhaps there are cognitive and physical parameters that help in terms of optimization. Feinberg admits his techniques are more effective for males than females. For example, it is much easier to gain muscle mass by simply changing nutrition and lifting if you have high testosterone. The Feinberg phenotype is not accessible to all. Feinberg and Razib also talk about his experiences in the corporate world, in particular at Google. Feinberg claims that in 2011 Google was a much more libertarian company than it was by the time he left in 2018. In particular, Feinberg noticed that many executives and senior managers began to lie and willfully mislead employees in order to scale the corporate ladder. These experiences helped convince him that the corporate world was not for him, and over the last five years, his focus has been on developing independent revenue streams through his <a href="https://sustaingluttony.gumroad.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">coaching, training and books</a>.

Alex Feinberg: former professional athlete and techie turned trainer

Adam Mastroianni

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks to Adam Mastroianni, who runs the Experimental History Substack. Mastroianni was the inaugural guest on the Intrinsic Perspective podcast, hosted by Erik Hoel, where they discussed his post, The rise and fall of peer review - Why the greatest scientific experiment in history failed, and why that's a great thing (see also his follow-up, The dance of the naked emperors). Mastroianni opened a can of worms; the post has more than 800 likes and more than 330 comments. Razib asks Mastroianni about the fiercely positive and negative reactions to his contention that modern peer review has outlived its utility. They also unveil the historically contingent origins of the practice in the mid-20th century, and how it came to be seen as a holy enterprise necessary to science. Both agree that scientific publishing needs a paradigm shift; a topic that Razib tackled in 2014 with the Genome Biology comment Dragging a scientific publishing into the 21st century. Razib and Mastroianni then discuss Experimental History, a Substack devoted to social psychology and meta-science. Why has Mastroianni decided to devote a substantial amount of energy to this project, as opposed to just publishing in journals?  Experimental History touches on some of the experimental social psychology research Mastroianni has been involved in, but it also focuses on some of the generally understood findings in psychology and neuroscience, and why they’re true or false. In a world of academic science saturated with Ph.D. level researchers, Razib and Mastroianni explore the communication possibilities inherent in the Substack model. Finally, Mastroianni unpacks his opinion that even many of the robust statistically significant findings in social psychology don’t matter. He believes that the lack of a single theory blocks proper understanding in psychology, and many of the results in his field are both uninteresting and fail to lead to a nontrivial increase in knowledge.

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks to <a href="https://www.adammastroianni.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Adam Mastroianni</a>, who runs the <a href="https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Experimental History</a> Substack. Mastroianni was the inaugural guest on the <a href="https://erikhoel.substack.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Intrinsic Perspective</a> <a href="https://erikhoel.substack.com/p/the-intrinsic-podcast-1-can-science" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">podcast</a>, hosted by <a href="https://www.erikphoel.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Erik Hoel</a>, where they discussed his post, <a href="https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/p/the-rise-and-fall-of-peer-review" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The rise and fall of peer review - Why the greatest scientific experiment in history failed, and why that's a great thing</a> (see also his follow-up, <a href="https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/p/the-dance-of-the-naked-emperors" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The dance of the naked emperors</a>). Mastroianni opened a can of worms; the post has more than 800 likes and more than 330 comments. Razib asks Mastroianni about the fiercely positive and negative reactions to his contention that modern peer review has outlived its utility. They also unveil the historically contingent origins of the practice in the mid-20th century, and how it came to be seen as a holy enterprise necessary to science. Both agree that scientific publishing needs a paradigm shift; a topic that Razib tackled in 2014 with the Genome Biology comment <a href="https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-014-0556-2" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Dragging a scientific publishing into the 21st century</a>. Razib and Mastroianni then discuss <a href="https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Experimental History</a>, a Substack devoted to social psychology and meta-science. Why has Mastroianni decided to devote <a href="https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/p/the-experimental-history-experiment" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">a substantial amount of energy</a> to this project, as opposed to just publishing in journals?  <a href="https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Experimental History</a> touches on some of the experimental social psychology research Mastroianni has been involved in, but it also focuses on some of the generally understood <a href="https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/p/the-radical-idea-that-people-arent" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">findings</a> in psychology and neuroscience, and why they’re true or false. In a world of academic science saturated with Ph.D. level researchers, Razib and Mastroianni explore the communication possibilities inherent in the Substack model. Finally, Mastroianni unpacks his opinion that even many of the robust statistically significant findings in social psychology don’t matter. He believes that the lack of a single theory blocks proper understanding in psychology, and many of the results in his field are both uninteresting and fail to lead to a nontrivial increase in knowledge.

Adam Mastroianni: a history of experiments in social psychology

David McKay

This week on Unsupervised Learning, Razib and his guest, David McKay, of the Standing on the Shoulders of Giants podcast (Razib was an early guest), discuss the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and the prospects for artificial general intelligence (AGI). This discussion arose after Razib heard McKay’s explainer, Zen and the Art of ChatGPT, a 30-minute layman’s intro to the topic, where he breaks down the technical elements that come together to allow for AI. In this episode, McKay, a Cambridge University-trained computer scientist who has worked at Hotmail and Google, digs deeper into the nature of Large Language Models (LLMs) and how they give rise to probabilistic generative AI like ChatGPT and whether we should be worried. Razib’s conversation with McKay follows another recent episode on AI. I  the earlier podcast, Nikolai Yakovenko: GPT-3 and the rise of the thinking machines, the interviewee, a computer scientist, was relatively sanguine about the world-ending possibilities of AGI. McKay generally takes the same position, highlighting the reality that most computer scientists and AI researchers are less worried about science-fictional apocalyptic scenarios than the general public or AI-skeptics like Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nick Bostrom (the author of Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies) are. And yet the reason that AI is so topical is it seems that the development of the technology is proceeding along an exponential path; ChatGPT 4 was released months after ChatGPT 3. McKay and Razib also discuss the release of Bard, Google’s chatbot, and the offering from Microsoft’s Bing, and how they are similar and different from ChatGPT.  While McKay is optimistic about the possibilities of AI as a tool, ultimately, he is in the camp that believes it really isn’t intelligent in the same way as a human. Because it relies on the corpus from the internet, ChatGPT cannot really do math. It lacks true conceptual understanding that would allow it to grasp truth beyond what the internet might tell it. Razib and McKay also talk about the energetic resources that LLMs consume (Microsoft had to reallocate compute resources after the release of Bing’s chatbot), and how that might be a limitation on their scalability.

This week on Unsupervised Learning, Razib and his guest, <a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/davidmckayv" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">David McKay</a>, of the <a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/davidmckayv" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Standing on the Shoulders of Giants</a> podcast (Razib was an <a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/davidmckayv/episodes/Geneticist-Razib-Khan-e1vcvtr" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">early guest</a>), discuss the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and the prospects for artificial general intelligence (AGI). This discussion arose after Razib heard McKay’s explainer, <a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/davidmckayv/episodes/Zen-and-the-Art-of-ChatGPT-e20qkd0" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Zen and the Art of ChatGPT</a>, a 30-minute layman’s intro to the topic, where he breaks down the technical elements that come together to allow for AI. In this episode, McKay, a Cambridge University-trained computer scientist who has worked at Hotmail and Google, digs deeper into the nature of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_language_model" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Large Language Models</a> (LLMs) and how they give rise to probabilistic generative AI like ChatGPT and whether we should be worried. Razib’s conversation with McKay follows another recent episode on AI. I  the earlier podcast, <a href="https://razib.substack.com/p/nikolai-yakovenko-rise-of-the-thinking#details" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Nikolai Yakovenko: GPT-3 and the rise of the thinking machines</a>, the interviewee, a computer scientist, was relatively sanguine about the world-ending possibilities of AGI. McKay generally takes the same position, highlighting the reality that most computer scientists and AI researchers are less worried about science-fictional apocalyptic scenarios than the general public or AI-skeptics like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliezer_Yudkowsky" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Eliezer Yudkowsky</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Bostrom" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Nick Bostrom</a> (the author of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superintelligence:_Paths,_Dangers,_Strategies" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies</a>) are. And yet the reason that AI is so topical is it seems that the development of the technology is proceeding along an exponential path; ChatGPT 4 was released months after ChatGPT 3. McKay and Razib also discuss the release of Bard, Google’s chatbot, and the offering from Microsoft’s Bing, and how they are similar and different from ChatGPT.  While McKay is optimistic about the possibilities of AI as a tool, ultimately, he is in the camp that believes it really isn’t intelligent in the same way as a human. Because it relies on the corpus from the internet, ChatGPT cannot really do math. It lacks true conceptual understanding that would allow it to grasp truth beyond what the internet might tell it. Razib and McKay also talk about the energetic resources that LLMs consume (Microsoft had to reallocate compute resources after the release of Bing’s chatbot), and how that might be a limitation on their scalability.

David McKay: AI and the end of the world as we know it

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks about the rise of modern humans, from their beginning as just one population among a diverse set of human species, to the dominant and only remaining lineage of hominids in the present. His reflections are colored by paleontological findings and begin with the evolution of modern humans and their distinctive physical characteristics in Africa more than 200,000 years ago, then moving on to their breakout from the ancestral continent and the disappearance of Neanderthals. It is at this point that, 50,000 years ago, ancient DNA findings and statistical genomics shape the rest of the story, as the net of modern human expansion pushes to every corner of Eurasia, and eventually makes the leap to Oceania and the New World.   Razib discusses the human phylogenetic tree, and how different populations relate to each other, but also explores the graph of relationships that illustrate how they have mixed. He also discusses the impact of the arrival of modern humans on local ecologies, as megafauna extinctions seem to correspond with the appearance of our species in Australia and the New World. Finally, he relates diverse contemporary populations to their prehistoric antecedents, outlining how the people we know today arrived at their current locations and who their ancestors were.

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks about the rise of modern humans, from their beginning as just one population among a diverse set of human species, to the dominant and only remaining lineage of hominids in the present. His reflections are colored by paleontological findings and begin with the evolution of modern humans and their distinctive physical characteristics in Africa more than 200,000 years ago, then moving on to their breakout from the ancestral continent and the disappearance of Neanderthals. It is at this point that, 50,000 years ago, ancient DNA findings and statistical genomics shape the rest of the story, as the net of modern human expansion pushes to every corner of Eurasia, and eventually makes the leap to Oceania and the New World.  <a href="https://razib.substack.com/p/yo-mamas-mamas-mamas-mama-etc" rel="noopener nofollow" target="_blank"></a> Razib discusses the human phylogenetic tree, and how different populations relate to each other, but also explores the graph of relationships that illustrate how they have mixed. He also discusses the impact of the arrival of modern humans on local ecologies, as megafauna extinctions seem to correspond with the appearance of our species in Australia and the New World. Finally, he relates diverse contemporary populations to their prehistoric antecedents, outlining how the people we know today arrived at their current locations and who their ancestors were.

The modern human conquest of earth

Steven Pinker

Twenty-one years ago, Steven Pinker’s The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature was published. A finalist for the Pulitzer Prize, The Blank Slate firmly established Pinker as one of the major public intellectuals in 21st-century America; it followed earlier works more narrowly focused on his discipline of psycholinguistics, The Language Instinct, Words and Rules and How the Mind Works. Evolutionary psychologist David Buss stated in a 2003 review that The Blank Slate “may be the most important book so far published in the 21st century.” Still Pinker’s third most cited publication after The Language Instinct and How the Mind Works, The Blank Slate shaped a generation of scholars and public intellectuals and influenced 21st-century public discourse to take a more scientifically informed view of both human nature’s biological basis and the inborn psychological traits that undergird the organization of society. On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks to Pinker about where we are today vis-a-vis the book's three major themes:   The blank slate or tabula rasa view of the mind as having no innate traits   The noble savage view of human nature where society corrupts individuals   The ghost in the machine, particularly as repurposed today in service of gender ideology   More than two decades after The Blank Slate debuted, the cultural status of these three touchstones has shifted; the blank slate, noble savage and ghost in the machine are all ascendant concepts. In the blank slate, social and individual outcomes are seen purely as pure products of systemic environmental forces. The idea of the noble savage, that humans are born naturally good, and only the corrupting influence of problematic institutions turns them into selfish and exclusionary people, has made a massive comeback as social justice culture attempts to perfect individuals into paragons of equity and inclusion. And though the ghost in the machine in the form of a supernatural soul is falling out of fashion, it has been replaced with the concept of deep-seated identities like gender being present innately at birth (or even in utero), entirely divorced from our material self.  Despite extraordinary advances in genome-wide association analysis and the application of cutting-edge computational biological techniques to understand how the brain and behavior work at the scale of DNA, much of American society remains wedded to the blank slate, and indeed widely applied policies have taken the implications of the assumption still further than a generation ago. Pinker points out that arguments for cultural variation driving group differences are now taboo, on top of the earlier wariness around exploring any genetic basis of these differences. Not only has the blank slate come back with force, it is more expansive than ever, rejecting even innate differences between the sexes. Razib addresses the decoupling of sex from gender and the reemergence of a ghost in the machine theory. Though traditional ideas of souls have faded, new concepts relating identity to a non-material sense of self have emerged. Pinker and Razib also discuss the collapse of organized religion, the rise of secularism in American culture and the attendant implications for how we view human nature and the good society. Finally, Razib argues that racial and cultural identitarianism often forward theories clearly rooted in the idea of a noble savage: that non-European peoples were corrupted by contact with Europeans.

Twenty-one years ago, <a href="https://stevenpinker.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Steven Pinker’s</a> <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000QCTNIM/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature</a> was published. A finalist for the Pulitzer Prize, The Blank Slate firmly established Pinker as one of the major public intellectuals in 21st-century America; it followed earlier works more narrowly focused on his discipline of psycholinguistics, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0049B1VOU/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Language Instinct</a>, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00PWX7S3W/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Words and Rules</a> and <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0042XA2XG/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">How the Mind Works</a>. Evolutionary psychologist David Buss stated in a 2003 <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20110927014150/http://pinker.wjh.harvard.edu/books/tbs/media_reviews/2002_12_pathways.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">review</a> that The Blank Slate “may be the most important book so far published in the 21st century.” Still Pinker’s third most <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&amp;user=bUhVerAAAAAJ&amp;view_op=list_works" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">cited</a> publication after The Language Instinct and How the Mind Works, The Blank Slate shaped a generation of scholars and public intellectuals and influenced 21st-century public discourse to take a more scientifically informed view of both human nature’s biological basis and the inborn psychological traits that undergird the organization of society. On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks to Pinker about where we are today vis-a-vis the book's three major themes: <ul> <li> The blank slate or tabula rasa view of the mind as having no innate traits </li> <li> The noble savage view of human nature where society corrupts individuals </li> <li> The ghost in the machine, particularly as repurposed today in service of gender ideology </li> </ul> More than two decades after The Blank Slate debuted, the cultural status of these three touchstones has shifted; the blank slate, noble savage and ghost in the machine are all ascendant concepts. In the blank slate, social and individual outcomes are seen purely as pure products of systemic environmental forces. The idea of the noble savage, that humans are born naturally good, and only the corrupting influence of problematic institutions turns them into selfish and exclusionary people, has made a massive comeback as social justice culture attempts to perfect individuals into paragons of equity and inclusion. And though the ghost in the machine in the form of a supernatural soul is falling out of fashion, it has been replaced with the concept of deep-seated identities like gender being present innately at birth (or even in utero), entirely divorced from our material self.  Despite extraordinary advances in genome-wide association analysis and the application of cutting-edge computational biological techniques to understand how the brain and behavior work at the scale of DNA, much of American society remains wedded to the blank slate, and indeed widely applied policies have taken the implications of the assumption still further than a generation ago. Pinker points out that arguments for cultural variation driving group differences are now taboo, on top of the earlier wariness around exploring any genetic basis of these differences. Not only has the blank slate come back with force, it is more expansive than ever, rejecting even innate differences between the sexes. Razib addresses the decoupling of sex from gender and the reemergence of a ghost in the machine theory. Though traditional ideas of souls have faded, new concepts relating identity to a non-material sense of self have emerged. Pinker and Razib also discuss the collapse of organized religion, the rise of secularism in American culture and the attendant implications for how we view human nature and the good society. Finally, Razib argues that racial and cultural identitarianism often forward theories clearly rooted in the idea of a noble savage: that non-European peoples were corrupted by contact with Europeans.

Steven Pinker: The Blank Slate 20+ years later

David Sloan Wilson

Dr. David Sloan Wilson is a Professor Emeritus of Biological Sciences and Anthropology at Binghamton University. Co-founder of the Evolution Institute and Prosocial World, Wilson is the author of Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior,  Darwin's Cathedral: Evolution, Religion and the Nature of Society, Evolution for Everyone: How Darwin’s Theory Can Change the Way We Think About Our Lives, This View of Life: Completing the Darwinian Revolution and  Atlas Hugged: The Autobiography of John Galt III. A self-described evolutionist, Wilson is perhaps best known in the scholarly world as the champion of multi-level selection theory. In this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks to Wilson about where multi-level selection theory is in 2023 and the progress made in the last five decades in understanding evolutionary processes through this pluralistic framework. This discussion is a sequel; in 2010, they discussed multi-level selection theory for bloggingheads.tv. Right off the bat, Wilson outlines his view that evolutionary theory has been too narrowly constrained within the straitjacket of the gene-centric view, which violates the spirit of Charles Darwin’s more expansive original vision, where adaptation driven by selection was inclusive of both culture and biology. Razib and Wilson also observe the growth of the field of cultural evolution that applies a Darwinian framework to understanding the variation across human societies and discuss Wilson’s early work on the adaptive value of religion in human societies. Wilson touches on the numerous fields in which he has been involved over the past few decades, from evolutionary psychology to revisionist economics. In keeping with attempting to apply his scholarship to the real world, Wilson’s latest project is ProSocial World, a nonprofit that aims to “facilitate and inspire positive cultural change using evolutionary and behavioral science.” 

Dr. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Sloan_Wilson" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">David Sloan Wilson</a> is a Professor Emeritus of Biological Sciences and Anthropology at Binghamton University. Co-founder of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_Institute" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Evolution Institute</a> and <a href="https://www.prosocial.world/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Prosocial World</a>, Wilson is the author of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B08J82CCPJ/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior</a>,  <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00DQMWSUY/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Darwin's Cathedral: Evolution, Religion and the Nature of Society</a>, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000OI0GCA/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Evolution for Everyone: How Darwin’s Theory Can Change the Way We Think About Our Lives</a>, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B07D6BZCH2/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">This View of Life: Completing the Darwinian Revolution</a> and <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B09W1NMPGZ/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"> </a><a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B09W1NMPGZ/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Atlas Hugged: The Autobiography of John Galt III</a>. A self-described evolutionist, Wilson is perhaps best known in the scholarly world as the champion of <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/20183239" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">multi-level selection theory</a>. In this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks to Wilson about where multi-level selection theory is in 2023 and the progress made in the last five decades in understanding evolutionary processes through this pluralistic framework. This discussion is a sequel; in 2010, they discussed multi-level selection theory for <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voavSTsPvrM" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">bloggingheads.tv</a>. Right off the bat, Wilson outlines his view that evolutionary theory has been too narrowly constrained within the straitjacket of the gene-centric view, which violates the spirit of Charles Darwin’s more expansive original vision, where adaptation driven by selection was inclusive of both culture and biology. Razib and Wilson also observe the growth of the field of cultural evolution that applies a Darwinian framework to understanding the variation across human societies and discuss Wilson’s early work on the adaptive value of religion in human societies. Wilson touches on the numerous fields in which he has been involved over the past few decades, from evolutionary psychology to revisionist economics. In keeping with attempting to apply his scholarship to the real world, Wilson’s latest project is <a href="https://www.prosocial.world/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">ProSocial World</a>, a nonprofit that aims to “facilitate and inspire positive cultural change using evolutionary and behavioral science.”

David Sloan Wilson: the past and future of multi-level selection theory

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib hosts three guests, Sarah Haider of A Special Place in Hell, Shadi Hamid of the Brookings Institute and Murtaza Hussain of The Intercept. Razib, Haider, Hamid and Hussain discuss the current state of the culture from the perspective of “brown” observers of the public sphere dominated by woke vs. anti-woke factions. Despite ideological differences, all four are skeptical of the ideological orthodoxies regnant in American culture, even though one, Hamid, identifies strongly as a partisan Democrat who is liberal. In a wide-ranging conversation (which begins with a review of how to pronounce each other’s names), they discuss the case of Raquel Evita Saraswati, a woman Haider knew casually from the social activism sphere, who represented herself as a queer Muslim of Arab, Latino and South-Asian background. Saraswati, a Muslim who somewhat perplexingly co-opted the name of a Hindu goddess as her surname, was born Rachel Elizabeth Seidel and is of British, German and Italian ancestry. Due to her fifteen years of lying about her ethnic background, she was recently forced out of a position as chief equity and inclusion officer for the American Friends Service Committee. Haider and Hamid, in particular, discuss the pressure felt in some social justice movements for people to present incongruous backgrounds, like being a “queer Muslim,” and how it has created a demand that is being satisfied by grifters like Saraswati. Saraswati highlights the role of religion and how it is inextricably connected to brown identity in the US, whether it is coded Muslim or Hindu. Razib and Haider, both atheists from a Muslim background, and Hamid and Hussain, both believing Muslims, discuss the American religious scene in the wake of New Atheism and the social and functional value of religion in an age where moral frameworks have been overthrown and updated. Hamid questions Haider on her views on the value of religious wisdom in maintaining and perpetuating social norms that she supports, like the idea that there are two sexes and her deemphasis on the importance of “gender identity.” Hussain explains that religion, in a philosophical sense, should be considered distinctively from a more primal and animistic set of intuitions. All four meditate on the fact that they are outsiders not by dint of their race or immigrant background (or parental immigrant background), but their dissent from the dominant social norms of the ascendant professional-managerial class.

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib hosts three guests, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Haider" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Sarah Haider</a> of <a href="https://aspecialplace.substack.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">A Special Place in Hell</a>, <a href="https://shadihamid.substack.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Shadi Hamid</a> of the <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/experts/shadi-hamid/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Brookings Institute</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/MazMHussain?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Murtaza Hussain</a> of <a href="https://theintercept.com/staff/murtaza-hussain/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Intercept</a>. Razib, Haider, Hamid and Hussain discuss the current state of the culture from the perspective of “brown” observers of the public sphere dominated by woke vs. anti-woke factions. Despite ideological differences, all four are skeptical of the ideological orthodoxies regnant in American culture, even though one, Hamid, identifies strongly as a partisan Democrat who is liberal. In a wide-ranging conversation (which begins with a review of how to pronounce each other’s names), they discuss the case of <a href="https://nypost.com/2023/03/01/raquel-saraswati-resigns-after-allegedly-faking-racial-identity/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Raquel Evita Saraswati</a>, a woman Haider knew casually from the social activism sphere, who represented herself as a queer Muslim of Arab, Latino and South-Asian background. Saraswati, a Muslim who somewhat perplexingly co-opted the name of a Hindu goddess as her surname, was born Rachel Elizabeth Seidel and is of British, German and Italian ancestry. Due to her fifteen years of lying about her ethnic background, she was recently forced out of a position as chief equity and inclusion officer for the American Friends Service Committee. Haider and Hamid, in particular, discuss the pressure felt in some social justice movements for people to present incongruous backgrounds, like being a “queer Muslim,” and how it has created a demand that is being satisfied by grifters like Saraswati. Saraswati highlights the role of religion and how it is inextricably connected to brown identity in the US, whether it is coded Muslim or Hindu. Razib and Haider, both atheists from a Muslim background, and Hamid and Hussain, both believing Muslims, discuss the American religious scene in the wake of New Atheism and the social and functional value of religion in an age where moral frameworks have been overthrown and updated. Hamid questions Haider on her views on the value of religious wisdom in maintaining and perpetuating social norms that she supports, like the idea that there are two sexes and her deemphasis on the importance of “gender identity.” Hussain explains that religion, in a philosophical sense, should be considered distinctively from a more primal and animistic set of intuitions. All four meditate on the fact that they are outsiders not by dint of their race or immigrant background (or parental immigrant background), but their dissent from the dominant social norms of the ascendant professional-managerial class.

Introducing the intellectual brown web (IBW)

This monologue is incomplete, for the complete monologue, checkout: Razib Khan's Unsupervised Learning Podcast Substack Why does human skin color vary so much? And what is the relationship between hair color, eye color and overall pigmentation? What genes control pigmentation in humans and other animals? Razib addresses all these questions in this episode of Unsupervised Learning, as he discusses the genetic basis and evolutionary origins of variation on this trait that has held such importance in our natural, social and cultural history. He notes that today we understand the genetic basis of pigmentation in terms of what variants control skin, hair and eye colors and how they relate to other traits, as well as their evolutionary trajectory over the past 100,000 years. Forensic pigmentation prediction tools in Europeans in particular are now excellent. But Razib notes that it remains a mystery exactly how natural and sexual selection relate to variation in human pigmentation. In Descent of Man, Charles Darwin proposed that racial differences were driven by sexual selection, and this framework has been picked up by later scholars and often emerges as an almost deus ex machina when it comes to explaining variation in pigmentation. The tempting explanation of Vitamin-D synthesis at high latitudes suffers from the reality that light skin has evolved recently in much of Europe, and many northern peoples like the Inuit remain comparatively dark.

This monologue is incomplete, for the complete monologue, checkout: <a href="https://razib.substack.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Razib Khan's Unsupervised Learning Podcast Substack</a> Why does human skin color vary so much? And what is the relationship between hair color, eye color and overall pigmentation? What genes control pigmentation in humans and other animals? Razib addresses all these questions in this episode of Unsupervised Learning, as he discusses the genetic basis and evolutionary origins of variation on this trait that has held such importance in our natural, social and cultural history. He notes that today we understand the genetic basis of pigmentation in terms of what variants control skin, hair and eye colors and how they relate to other traits, as well as their evolutionary trajectory over the past 100,000 years. Forensic pigmentation prediction tools in Europeans in particular are now excellent. But Razib notes that it remains a mystery exactly how natural and sexual selection relate to variation in human pigmentation. In <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1463645961//geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Descent of Man</a>, Charles Darwin proposed that racial differences were driven by sexual selection, and this framework has been picked up by <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1877275727//geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">later scholars</a> and often emerges as an almost deus ex machina when it comes to explaining variation in pigmentation. The tempting explanation of Vitamin-D synthesis at high latitudes suffers from the reality that light skin has evolved recently in much of Europe, and many northern peoples like the Inuit remain comparatively dark.

Human pigmentation: the genetics and evolution of human shades

Glenn Loury

Today on the podcast Razib talks to Dr. Glenn Loury, Merton P. Stoltz Professor of the Social Sciences at Brown University. Loury also has a Substack that grew out of his conversations with John McWhorter on bloggingheads.tv starting in 2008. He is the author of One by One from the Inside Out, The Anatomy of Racial Inequality and Race, Incarceration, and American Values. An erstwhile progressive, Loury was a neoconservative in the 1980’s before his gradual shift to back the political right in the 2010’s.  Loury has been in public life for more than 25 years, but today’s discussion begins with his scholarship in the 1970’s as a young MIT economist. Razib goes back to Loury’s 1976 paper, A dynamic theory of racial income differences, and still his most cited publication. In many ways, the argument within the paper anticipated “wokeness” and theories of systemic racial privilege. Loury broadly agrees but emphasizes that it’s been nearly 40 years since he began writing that paper, and much has changed, including his judgment of the state of American society. A dynamic theory of racial income differences argues that inter-generational differences in human capital accumulation cannot be abolished simply through repealing discriminatory laws or norms. In other words, where you start in life matters, and centuries of oppression would have long-lasting effects. But the paper was written at a very different time in a very different America, in the wake of the Civil Rights movement and before an America reshaped by immigration. Razib and Loury also touch on his ideological and personal evolution and how he views the last few decades, going from conservative to liberal to conservative again. Loury speculates on the possible trajectories of different futures in the United States. He emphasizes that we live in a global world and that the choices we make now in terms of how we leverage our human capital matter greatly in the context of international competition. They also discuss the academy's state, its role in the culture wars, and Loury’s rejection of progressive ideological conformity that he believes threatens the foundation of the scholarly enterprise. 

Today on the podcast Razib talks to <a href="https://twitter.com/GlennLoury?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Dr. Glenn Loury</a>, <a href="https://www.brown.edu/Departments/Economics/Faculty/Glenn_Loury/louryhomepage/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Merton P. Stoltz Professor of the Social Sciences</a> at Brown University. Loury also has a <a href="https://glennloury.substack.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Substack</a> that grew out of his conversations with <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/by/john-mcwhorter" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">John McWhorter</a> on <a href="https://bloggingheads.tv/programs/glenn-show" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">bloggingheads.tv</a> starting in 2008. He is the author of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0029194415/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">One by One from the Inside Out</a>, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B002OSY9YE/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Anatomy of Racial Inequality</a> and<a href="https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B08BT4WHFG/geneexpressio-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"> Race, Incarceration, and American Values</a>. An erstwhile progressive, Loury was a neoconservative in the 1980’s before his gradual shift to back the political right in the 2010’s.  Loury has been in public life for more than 25 years, but today’s discussion begins with his scholarship in the 1970’s as a young MIT economist. Razib goes back to Loury’s 1976 paper, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&amp;hl=en&amp;user=Dc50YDIAAAAJ&amp;cstart=200&amp;pagesize=100&amp;sortby=pubdate&amp;citation_for_view=Dc50YDIAAAAJ:evX43VCCuoAC" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">A dynamic theory of racial income differences</a>, and still his most cited publication. In many ways, the argument within the paper anticipated “wokeness” and theories of systemic racial privilege. Loury broadly agrees but emphasizes that it’s been nearly 40 years since he began writing that paper, and much has changed, including his judgment of the state of American society. <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&amp;hl=en&amp;user=Dc50YDIAAAAJ&amp;cstart=200&amp;pagesize=100&amp;sortby=pubdate&amp;citation_for_view=Dc50YDIAAAAJ:evX43VCCuoAC" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">A dynamic theory of racial income differences</a> argues that inter-generational differences in human capital accumulation cannot be abolished simply through repealing discriminatory laws or norms. In other words, where you start in life matters, and centuries of oppression would have long-lasting effects. But the paper was written at a very different time in a very different America, in the wake of the Civil Rights movement and before an America reshaped by immigration. Razib and Loury also touch on his ideological and personal evolution and how he views the last few decades, going from conservative to liberal to conservative again. Loury speculates on the possible trajectories of different futures in the United States. He emphasizes that we live in a global world and that the choices we make now in terms of how we leverage our human capital matter greatly in the context of international competition. They also discuss the academy's state, its role in the culture wars, and Loury’s rejection of progressive ideological conformity that he believes threatens the foundation of the scholarly enterprise.

Glenn Loury: four decades in economics

Razib Khan engages a diverse array of thinkers on all topics under the sun. Genetics, history, and politics. See: <a href="http://razib.substack.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://razib.substack.com/</a>

Razib Khan's Unsupervised Learning

The best podcast episodes on romantic relationships. Episodes talk about the 5 love languages, intimacy, and the taboo topics of sexual desires and infidelity. This topic is a deep dive into the science and complexities that face us in our relationships with others. Add episodes you're interested into your queue below!

Best Episodes on Relationships & Love

The best podcasts on investing. For anyone interested in the stories in the investing industry, whether it's an interview with Ray Dalio or Ed Thorp to the writer of The Big Short. This topic includes the most fascinating stories from all the best investors. Add episodes you're interested into your queue below!