Space | Evolution | Physics | Social Sciences | Natural Sciences | DNA | Psychology | Biotech | Medicine | Anthropology | Astronomy

Dacher Keltner in Conversation

More videos from these partners:

and W. W. Norton

  • Info
  • Bio
  • Chapters
  • Preview
  • Download
  • Zoom In
There are 4 comments on this program

Please or register to post a comment.
Previous FORAtv comments:
Chrissy Michelle Strawn Avatar
Chrissy Michelle Strawn
Posted: 03.21.09, 11:52 PM
That was a very good question. I reluctantly have to agree that burying ones face in a cell phone and texting all the time may not be a good thing for the human condition. But is that all that these people do? I think not. The same question could be asked about video games. But I think this question is pointed in the wrong direction. Are these people who use these devices constantly becoming addicted? That people can get so enured by such simple things such as these devices, alcohol, and drugs is the tragedy.
amoffat Avatar
Posted: 02.21.09, 04:39 AM
it's important to understand that using an abstract layer of communication (tech), helps evolve certain "blind" intuitions. where once we could infer the emotions of someone by their faces and gestures, now we are learning to infer them from subtleties such as word usage, the tone of responses, and timing...all 3 of these blind to actual "physical" cues. i would argue that tech is evolving our senses of perception as we grapple with understanding context in an environment where context is not explicit.
rocketdog Avatar
Posted: 02.20.09, 12:07 PM
Speaking of devo, here's something interesting I found out a while ago: the idea of "de-evolution" is a biological fallacy. The de-evo myth is based on the assumption that evolution is meant to occur in a positive, singular direction, and any perceived "regression" to previously held ("less-developed") evolutionary traits run counter to that line of progress and therefore are a Bad Thing. In fact, changes that occur due to evolution are just that -- adaptations due to environmental or other circumstance, and nothing more. It's certainly possible, if not highly likely, that technology is affecting our evolutionary development as a species, but from a strictly objective, biological point-of-view, it's a fallacy to assume those changes are negative because some of them can be viewed from our current situation as less "complex." I haven't figured out how to link in this version of the comment box, but the Wikipedia article on biological devolution is pretty good:
But words - words are not enough! - Klaus Kinski
rocketdog Avatar
Posted: 02.19.09, 03:36 PM
Are we not men?
But words - words are not enough! - Klaus Kinski