Spinal Catastrophism: The Secret Story in Your Bones

47:47 as a psycho-linguist, what the fuck

What a brilliant compilation. I am totally grateful to have stumbled here. WOW!!

What a trip. I loved it.

Has Aristotle never seen a cat, dog, or rodent back up? Loads of animals do it.

Nice voice, cool topic. sub earned

I love your videos and work but like… Goddamn please just ask for a German pronunciation before recording it lol

Generic positive comment 👍🏻
Wish you the best, good video

great video keep it up😊

Algorithm boost

Holy shit element upload? Peak

I found myself almost obsessively checking my posture when standing up straight was mentioned

Babe wake up element uploaded

A monad is a monoid in the category of endofunctors, what’s the problem?

In all seriousness, this video is quite the journey. What a way to kick off the new year lmao. I haven’t Googled this many terms watching a YouTube video in a while. Incredible work!

No better way to kick off the new year than listening to this

I strongly disagree with the idea that human defenselessness and flaws were what forced us to adapt and develop tools, speech, structures for foresight and so on. All of those processes are very evolutionarily old – they are gradual accumulation of small changes, each an individual tradeoff. It's not that 'we are flawed and therefore strive higher', but rather, evolutionarily, a lot of the 'striving-adjacent' systems (tool use, neuroplasticity, foresight, speech) were individually adaptive and highly selected-for, even at the cost of existing systems (i.e. even at the cost of introducing flaws, such as our ability to choke on food being a result of throat adaptations for speech that are not present in our close relative chimpanzees). The striving-tools actually were selected for, even though they also introduced flaws, because that tradeoff was evolutionarily worthwhile (and often the new feature, e.g. improved foresight, allowed us to compensate for the flaws it introduced, e.g. slower postnatal neurodevelopment). I know that robs humanity of a bit of the 'agency' afforded by the philosophical model being proposed here, but ultimately, it's a nonsensical notion to think that flaws came FIRST and then were addressed – evolution doesn't work that way, it doesn't have foresight and cannot throw out the old blueprints, only modify them (one of the main reasons that early natal development 'recapitulates old forms' – early natal development is just riskier and harder for evolution to tamper with, it's 'good enough', so all the vestigial stuff is left in. To adapt a completely unrelated field's idea without much direct reason (see, I can do it too, mr author!) evolution optimizes for LOCAL maxima rather than GLOBAL maxima, it cannot go one step back to take two steps forward.

just commenting to help with the algorithm because only 11 views on an in-depth 1 hour 40 minute video is criminal

How long is this video