Many Minds

Molly Crockett, a Psychology Professor at Princeton specializing in moral and social cognition, shares insights on AI's transformative potential in science. She discusses four visions of AI: as Oracle, Surrogate, Quant, and Arbiter, revealing how each can mislead our understanding of science. The conversation tackles the ethical implications of using AI as experimental subjects, the risks of anthropomorphizing technology, and the dangers of over-reliance on AI, stressing the need for a balanced approach to enhance human understanding and creativity in research.

Puppies wrestling and mock-biting each other. Toddlers playing hide and seek. Kittens pouncing—repeatedly—on a toy mouse. You've no doubt looked on at scenes like this with amusement. And you've no doubt seen some of those viral videos—of ravens sledding down hills, of bumble bees playing with balls. All these moments make us smile, maybe even giggle. But the scientific questions they raise merit serious attention. Where do we see play in the animal kingdom? Where do we not? What functions does play serve? Do we—and many other creatures—have an elemental need for play? My guest today is Dr. Gordon Burghardt. Gordon is a longtime Professor in the Department of Psychology and the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Tennessee. For decades now, Gordon has been a pioneer in the study of animal play, with a particular focus on play in reptiles and other animals not usually considered playful. His 2005 book, The Genesis of Animal Play, remains a landmark in the field. Here, Gordon and I talk about the major types of play: locomotor play, object play, and social play. We discuss the five criteria he has proposed for recognizing play across animal taxa. We survey several of the functions of play that have been proposed over the decades, and discuss how—in the end—play doesn't seem to have just one function. We also talk about human play—about what sets it apart, and about the possibility that play lies at the root of many of the capacities and institutions we think of as distinctively, impressively human. Along the way, Gordon and I touch on play in bears, pythons, turtles, fruit flies, and octopuses. We consider play between members of taxonomically distant species. We talk about “self-handicapping”; the surplus resource theory of play; the importance of "risky play" and "free play"; the immersive quality of play; bodily and vocal play signals in mammals; and whether human play is increasingly endangered.  Without further ado, here's my conversation with Dr. Gordon Burghardt. Enjoy!   A transcript of this episode is available here.   Notes and links 3:00 – A news article on the finding of “play-like” behavior in fruit flies. The original study. 4:30 – For recent reviews of play by Dr. Burghardt and colleagues, covering the three major types of play, the five criteria for recognizing play, and many other topics, see here, here, and here. 12:00 – For more on Dr. Burghardt’s early research and hand-rearing of black bears, see here. 23:30 – For the recent study on ball play in bumble bees, see here.  26:00 – For an example of studies examining self-handicapping, see this study on belugas.  27:00 – For a video of a bull and goat butting heads, see here. For more on cross-species play, see this recent paper by Dr. Burghardt and a colleague. 31:00 – For more on the “relaxed open mouth expression” and “play face,” see our previous episode on the origins of the smile.  For a recent study about such expressions possibly attested in dolphins, see here. 44:00 – For the book by Johan Huizinga, see here. For some of Dr. Burghardt’s ideas about the connections between play and certain aspects of human culture, see here.  54:00 – For research on the value of “risky play,” see work by Dr. Ellen Sandseter. For an article connecting “free play” and children’s mental health, see here.   Recommendations Kingdom of Play, by David Toomey   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com.  For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

If you've heard anything about the study of human personality, you've probably heard about the “big five.” This is a framework that attempts to characterize human personality in terms of five broad factors or dimensions—neuroticism, extraversion, openness, conscientiousness, and agreeableness. The big five framework has been enormously influential, generating heaps and heaps of data, and study after study on the stability of personality, on the factors that shape our personalities, on how our personalities predict success and satisfaction. But is the big five really the best we can do? What does it miss? What does it mask? Where should the science of human personality go next? My guest today is Dr. René Mõttus. René is Professor of Psychology at the University of Edinburgh, and a leading researcher in the scientific study of human personality. He’s also one of the hosts of the Personality Psychology Podcast. Here, René and I talk about the history and colossal success of the “big five.” We consider whether personality is ultimately rooted in our biology—and, if so, how. We dwell on each of the five factors and dig into the facets and nuances within them. These are, actually, technical terms in the field for the more granular aspects of personality that sit within each of these broad dimensions. We talk about personality change across the lifespan, and what factors seem to be driving it. We talk about personality and occupation, personality and birth order, personality and gender. Along the way, René and I touch on the Myers-Briggs; an alternative to the Big 5 known as the HEXACO model; the power of explicit questionnaires over experiments; the concept of "personality age"; the social investment theory; honesty, humility, humor, jealousy; life satisfaction; gene-environment correlations; and why evolutionary stories about personality seem to fail. Alright friends, I think you'll like this one. On to my conversation with Dr. René Mõttus. Enjoy!   A transcript of this episode is available here.   Notes and links 5:30 – For a popular discussion of the Myers-Briggs and other personality tests, see here. For a book-length treatment of the history of the Myers-Briggs test, see here. 11:30 – For Dr. Mõttus’s preprint on “personality age,” see here. 17:00 – For our episode on animal personality with Dr. Kate Laskowski, see here. 18:00 – For Dr. Daniel Nettle’s book on personality, see here. 22:00 – See Dr. Mõttus’s blog post on the genetic basis of personality. 25:00 – For our episode with Dr. Eric Turkheimer about IQ, see here. For Dr. Turkheimer’s “phenotypic null hypothesis” about personality, see here. 28:00 – For a theoretical paper by Dr. Mõttus and colleagues about “carving personality at its joints” and “big few models”—among many other issues—see here. 31:00 – See here for a classic overview of the “big five.” 38:00 – For an overview of the predictive power of the “big five,” see here. 40:00 – On the topic of “nuances,” see Dr. Mõttus’s recent co-authored paper here. 43:00 – For the study by Dr. Mõttus and colleagues of the personality profiles of different occupations, see here. For an online tool that allows you to explore the data, see here. For an online tool that matches your personality with the personality profiles of different occupations, see here. 47:00 – A classic paper on the HEXACO model of personality. 51:00 – An example of a recent effort to map out the “facets” of personality. 1:11:00 – For a study on the possibility of gene-environment correlations in the area of music, see here. For the study by Dr. Mõttus and colleagues on children “becoming less alike” through adolescence, see here. 1:18:00 – For a classic statement of the “five factor theory,” see here. 1:20:00 – The Wikipedia page for the idea of the “gloomy prospect” is here. This is also the name of Dr. Turkheimer’s newsletter. 1:22:00 – The latest installment in the longstanding debate about birth order and personality. 1:27:00 – A paper comparing the “five factor” and “social investment” accounts of personality development. 1:33:00 – For a recent paper by Dr. Mõttus and colleagues on personality and gender, see here. 1:38:00 – A research article on the Estonian Biobank.   Recommendations ‘Life Events and Personality Change: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,’ by Bühler et al. ‘Personality stability and change: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies,’ by Bleidorn et al. ‘Choosing prediction over explanation in psychology: Lessons from machine learning,’ by Yarkoni & Westfall   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com.  For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

Some call it the "psychedelic renaissance." In the last decade or so, interest in psychedelic drugs has surged—and not just among Silicon Valley types and psychiatrists and neuroscientists. It's also surged among a stereotypically soberer crowd: academic philosophers. The reasons are clear. With their varied and sometimes transformative effects, psychedelics raise ethical questions, epistemological questions, metaphysical questions, questions about the nature of experience and the nature of the mind. My guest today is Dr. Chris Letheby. Chris is a philosopher of cognitive science at the University of Western Australia and the author of the 2021 book, Philosophy of Psychedelics. Here, Chris and I talk about the so-called classic psychedelics—LSD, psilocybin, ayahuasca, and others—and how interest in them has gone through three distinct waves. We discuss the effects that these substances seem to have, in particular their capacity to treat certain psychiatric conditions and their tendency to induce "mystical-like" experiences. We consider the idea that psychedelics might serve as agents of moral enhancement. And we dig into the psychological and neural mechanisms by which psychedelics seem to have their diverse—and often salutary—effects. Along the way, we talk about ontological shock, comforting delusions, brain plasticity, unselfing, microdosing, placebo effects and adverse effects, physicalism and idealism, the REBUS model, environmental virtues, plant consciousness, meditation, and much more. Maybe this is obvious but this episode is not just for the seasoned psychonauts out there. Whatever your personal experience with these substances, they offer a distinctive window into the mind—a new way of grappling with big questions. Perhaps this much is also obvious but we're not encouraging or endorsing the use of psychedelics here—just offering a little fuel for your intellectual fires! Alright friends, on to my conversation w/ Dr. Chris Letheby. Enjoy!   A transcript of this episode is available here.    Notes and links 4:00 – For a brief historical overview of research into psychedelics, see this paper. 8:30 – For work by an early trailblazer in the philosophy of psychedelics, see Thomas Metzinger’s Being No One. 12:30 – For our earlier episode on the psychology and philosophy of visual illusions, see here.  18:00 – For a history of the concept of “set and setting,” see here. 19:00 – A 2024 review of “adverse events” in classic psychedelics. 26:00 – A blog post on the history of the term “psychedelic.” 27:00 – A recent review and meta-analysis of the use of psychedelic therapy for depressive symptoms. 31:00 – On mystical experience see Walter Stace’s classic work, Mysticism and Philosophy. On the measurement of mystical-type experiences, see, e.g., Walter Pahnke’s paper here. 36:00 – On the idea of “psychoplastogens,” see here. 39:00 – See our earlier audio essay on placebo effects. 41:00 – For the study using Ritalin as an active placebo, see here.  44:00 – Michael Pollan’s book on psychedelics is here. 48:00 – On the idea of “idealism,” see here. 50:30 – For the 2021 study on psychedelics’ capacity to alter metaphysical beliefs, see here. 54:00 – For Dr. Letheby and collaborators’ paper about the “mysticism wars,” see here. 1:02:00 – For a popular article on the possibility that psychedelics reduce fear of death, see here. 1:03:00 – For Dr. Letheby’s paper on psychedelics and the fear of death, see here. 1:11:00 – The phrase “comforting delusion” comes from an article by Michael Pollan. 1:15:00 – For the “REBUS model,” see here. 1:20:00 – On the idea that psychedelics could serve as agents of moral enhancement, see the paper by Brian Earp here. 1:21:00 – For Dr. Letheby’s paper on psychedelics and environmental virtues, see here. For his paper on psychedelics and forgiveness, see here. 1:23:00 – On the subfield of “virtue ethics,” see here. On the virtue of “living in place,” see the paper by Nin Kirkham here. 1:28:00 – For the New Yorker article, by Matthew Hutson, on how psychedelics led him to see trees as smart, see here. For the study, led by Sandeep Nayak, on psychedelics leading people to expand their attributions of consciousness, see here. 1:32:00 – For a first paper by Dr. Letheby on the comparison between meditation and psychedelics, see here.   Recommendations Psychedelic Experience, Aidan Lyon Varieties of Psychedelic Experience, Robert Masters & Jean Houston The Antipodes of the Mind, Benny Shanon   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala.   Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com.    For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

We humans have a hard time becoming invisible. For better or worse, we're basically stuck with the skin and body we have; we’re pretty fixed in our color, our shape, our overall appearance. And so we're fascinated by creatures that aren't—creatures that morph to meet the moment, that can functionally disappear, that can shape-shift on a dime. And no creatures are more skilled, more astonishing, more bedazzling in their abilities to do this kind of thing than the cephalopods. But how do they do this exactly? What's going on in their skin? What's going on under their skin? And what's going on in their brains that makes this all possible? My guest today is Dr. Tessa Montague. Tessa is a neuroscientist in the Axel Lab at Columbia University; she studies the brain and behavior of the dwarf cuttlefish, with a special focus on the biology of their dynamic skin behaviors. Here, Tessa and I talk about how cuttlefish and other cephalopods exhibit the most impressive camouflaging abilities on the planet. We discuss how they change their skin's appearance with remarkable speed and fidelity—and not just when trying to blend in, but also when hunting, courting, fighting, and more. We talk about whether these behaviors are flexible and whether they're voluntary. We linger on the cruel irony that cuttlefish seem to be colorblind. We talk about the idea that a cephalopod's skin is kind of a window into their brain. We lay out the cells and organs in the cephalopod skin the make these behaviors possible—especially the tiny pigment-bearing structures called "chromatophores." And of course we also dive deep into the cephalopod brain and its sometimes bizarre and poorly understood structures. Excited to share it with you friends—I think you'll enjoy it. Without further ado, here's my chat with Dr. Tessa Montague.   A transcript of this episode is available here.   Notes and links 3:00 – For more on Dr. Montague’s recent expeditions to the Philippines, including photos, see here. 7:30 – Dr. Montague has published two recent reviews of dynamic skin behaviors in cephalopods—see here and here. We previously discussed cephalopod intelligence in a 2021 episode with Dr. Alex Schnell and a 2023 episode with the novelist Ray Nayler. 18:30 – For discussion of a recent “renaissance” in new model organisms, see here. 20:30 – For more on how chameleons change color, see this video. 25:00 – A video primer on cuttlefish camouflage, featuring the researcher Dr. Robert Hanlon. 30:30 – A recent paper on the details of pattern matching in cuttlefish camouflage. 31:00 – For more on the mimicking plant Boquila trifoliolata, see this popular article. See also our earlier episode with Dr. Paco Calvo and Dr. Natalie Lawrence. 35:00 – A video about the so-called mimic octopus.  40:00 – For the hypothesis about color discrimination via chromatic aberration and pupil shape, see here. 44:00 – For more on the “split body” skin behaviors observed in some cuttlefish, see here. 51:00 – For the David Attenborough clip about a cuttlefish hypnotizing a crab, see here. For the recent New York Times article on cuttlefish hunting behavior, including videos, see here. For the academic article that inspired the New York Times piece, see here. 58:00 – A recent scientific study on the possibility of octopus skin activity during dreaming. A video that helped popularize the idea of cephalopod skin activity as evidence of dreaming. Our earlier episode on why we—and other creatures—dream. 1:06:00 – For a study on chromatophore development from the lab of Dr. Gilles Laurent, see here. 1:11:00 – For more on papillae, including videos, see here.  1:17:00 – To explore an animated model of the cuttlefish brain, see this page of Dr. Montague’s website, Cuttlebase.   Recommendations Monarchs of the Sea, Danna Staaf Other Minds, Peter Godfrey-Smith Cephalopod Behavior, Roger Hanlon & John B. Messenger   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com.    For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

You've probably come across the "free energy principle." It's become one of the most influential ideas in the broader cognitive sciences. Since the neuroscientist Karl Friston first introduced it in 2005, the theory has been fleshed out, extended, generalized, criticized, and cited thousands and thousands of times. But what is this idea, exactly? What does it say about the nature of brains and minds? What does it say about the phenomenon of life itself? And is anything that it says really that new? My guest today is Dr. Kate Nave. Kate is a philosopher at the University of Edinburgh and the author of the new book, A Drive to Survive: The Free Energy Principle and the Meaning of Life. In the book, Kate offers an extended critical analysis of the free energy principle and situates it in a broader landscape of ideas about the nature of life and mind. In this conversation, Kate and I talk about how the free energy principle has changed over time, from its beginnings as a theory of cortical responses in the brain to its eventual status as a theory of... well, a lot. We discuss why this theory has had such an enormous influence, and we talk about how many of the key ideas behind it actually have a long history. We consider some kindred spirits of the free energy framework— approaches like cybernetics, enactivism, predictive processing, and autopoiesis. We walk through a series of questions that all these approaches have long grappled with. Questions like: What does it mean to be alive? What is the relationship between being alive and being cognitive? What are the roles of prediction and representation in cognition? And we ask how—if it all—the free energy principle gives us new answers to these old questions. Along the way, Kate and I touch on: surprisal, visual phenomenology, vitalism, Husserl and Merleau-Ponty, Maturana and Varela, pendulums and bacteria, computation and models, primordial purposiveness, pancakes, and whether we'll ever be able to create artificial life. As you might be able to tell from the description I just gave, this conversation goes pretty deep—and it does get a bit technical. It dives down into the history and philosophy around some of the most foundational questions we can ask about minds. If that sounds like your cup of tea, enjoy. Alright friends, on to my conversation with Dr. Kate Nave!   A transcript of this episode is available here.   Notes and links 5:00 – The 2005 paper in which Karl Friston proposed the principle of free energy minimization. Friston later generalized the ideas here and here. 14:00 – For influential philosophical work on action in perception, see Alva Nöe’s book, Action in Perception. 17:00 – One of the classic works in the “enactivist” tradition is Evan Thompson’s book, Mind in Life. 18:00 – The actual quip, credited to Carl Sagan, is about “apple pie” not pancakes: “If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.” 20:00 – The notion of “autopoiesis” (or “self-creation”) was introduced by Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela in their book, Autopoiesis and Cognition. 24:00 – A classic paper of cybernetics from 1943, ‘Behavior, purpose, and teleology.’ 37:00 – For more on the idea of “predictive processing,” see our earlier episode with Dr. Mark Miller. 43:00 – For a discussion of the idea of “representation” in the philosophy of cognitive science, see here. For a discussion of “anti-representationalism,” see here.   Recommendations ‘Organisms, Machines, and Thunderstorms: A History of Self-Organization,’ (part 1) (part 2), Evelyn Fox Keller The Mechanization of the Mind, Jean-Pierre Dupuy ‘The Reflex Machine and the Cybernetic Brain,’ M. Chirimuuta   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com.    For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

Are human emotions universal? Or do they vary from one place to the next and from one time period to the next? It's a big question, an old question. And every discipline that's grappled with it brings its own take, its own framings and forms of evidence. Some researchers appeal to cross-cultural experiments; others turn to neuroimaging studies or conceptual analysis. Some even look to fiction. My guest today is Dr. Bradley Irish, an Associate Professor of English Literature at Arizona State University. Brad is the author of a new book, The Universality of Emotion: Perspectives from the Sciences and Humanities; in it he maps the landscape of debate around this long-contested topic. Brad is also the author of numerous articles and books on the emotions in Shakespeare's plays, as well as in the work of other early modern authors. Here, Brad and I talk about both sides of his work—his writing as an observer of cross-disciplinary debates about the universality of emotion and his writing as a scholar of literature. We sketch four prominent theories of emotions—basic emotions theory, appraisal theories, psychological construction theories, and social construction theories. We weigh the idea that some emotions are more universal than others. We talk about the role that language might play in our emotional experience. And we consider why many literary scholars tend to be deeply suspicious of claims about human universality. Along the way, Brad and I also touch on: the theory of ur-emotions, the aims of literary analysis; disgust, anger, schadenfreude, anxiety; frogs and public dissections; Shakespeare as a supposedly universal poet; and Brad's latest project on neurodiversity in literature. If you're enjoying the show, we would be most grateful if you could give us a rating or review, maybe even a shout-out on your social media platform of choice. For those who listen on Spotify, you can also now leave comments on individual episodes—which is a great way to let us know what you think. Alright friends, on to my conversation with Brad Irish. Enjoy! A transcript of this episode is available here.    Notes and links 7:00 – For an example of an anti-universalist treatment from a literary scholar, see here. See also Dr. Irish’s brief essay on the idea of universality in literary studies. 12:00 – For Dr. Irish’s first book—on emotions in the early modern period—see here.  15:00 – For a recent review/update of the “basic emotions theory” tradition, see here.  21:00 – An influential early paper on facial expressions of emotion across cultures. A more recent, critical perspective on the relationship between facial expressions and emotions.  23:00 – For a review of social constructionist approaches to emotion, see here. 24:00 – A recent review of the “appraisal theories” of emotion. 26:00 – Psychological constructionist theories of emotion are most strongly associated with the work of Dr. Lisa Feldman Barrett and colleagues. For an articulation of these views, see here. 33:00 – For more on the relationship between language and emotion, see influential recent studies here, here, and here.  39:00 – The paper introducing the concept of “ur-emotions.” 44:00 – Dr. Patrick Colm Hogan’s book, What Literature Teaches Us about Emotion. 49:00 – Dr. Irish’s book, Shakespeare & Disgust: The History and Science of Early Modern Revulsion. 58:00 – For an influential paper on disgust in general, see here. For more on moral disgust in particular, see here. 1:07:00 – For the idea that disgust evolved to help us avoid disease, see here. 1:15:00 – For more on the idea that fictions can be thought of as simulations of psychology and the social world, see our earlier episode on stories. 1:16:00 – For more about Dr. Irish’s latest research project, see his new book, Literary Neurodiversity Studies.   Recommendations Emotion Theory: The Routledge Comprehensive Guide, edited by Andrea Scarantino   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com.  For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

Hi friends, We're taking care of some spring cleaning this week. We'll be back in two weeks with a new episode. In the meantime, enjoy this favorite from our archives! - The Many Minds team ––––––––– [originally aired February 22, 2024] Brains are not cheap. It takes a lot of calories to run a brain, and the bigger your brain, the more calories it takes. So how is it that, over the last couple million years, the human brain tripled in size. How could we possibly have afforded that? Where did the extra calories come from? There's no shortage of suggestions out there. Some say it was meat; others say it was tubers; many say it was by mastering fire and learning to cook. But now there's a newer proposal on the table and—spoiler—it's a bit funky. My guests today are Katherine Bryant, Postdoctoral Fellow at Aix-Marseille University, and Erin Hecht, Assistant Professor in the Department of Human Evolutionary Biology at Harvard. Katherine, Erin, and another colleague are the authors of a new paper titled 'Fermentation technology as a driver of human brain expansion.' In it, they argue that fermented foods could have provided the caloric boost that allowed our brains to expand. Here, we talk about how the human body differs from the bodies of other great apes, not just in terms of our brains but also in terms of our bowels. We discuss the different mechanisms by which fermented foods provide nutritional benefits over unfermented foods. We consider how fermentation—which basically happens whether you want it to or not—would have been cognitively easier to harness than fire. Along the way, we touch on kiviaq, chicha, makgeolli, hákarl, natto, Limburger cheese, salt-rising bread, and other arguably delectable products of fermentation.  This is a fun one friends. But before we get to it: a friendly reminder about this summer's Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute. This a yearly event in St Andrews, Scotland; it features a rich program of lectures and events devoted to the study of cognition, mind, and intelligence in all its forms. If you have a taste for cross-disciplinary ferment and bubbly conversation, DISI may be for you. The application window is now open but is closing soon. You can find more info at DISI.org. That's D-I-S-I.org. Alright, friends, on to my conversation with Erin Hecht and Katherine Bryant. Enjoy!     A transcript of this episode is available here.   Notes and links 3:00 – A popular science article about the “infectiously delicious confection” that is salt-rising bread. A recipe for the bread.  6:00 – An article about makgeolli, a Korean rice wine. An article about chicha, the traditional corn-based fermented beverage that has been banned in some places. 11:30 – An article about the role of the arcuate fasciculus in language processing. A recent paper by Dr. Bryant and colleagues comparing the arcuate in humans and chimpanzees. 12:30 – A recent article by Dr. Hecht and colleagues on the evolutionary neuroscience of domestication.   13:00 – For discussions of the encephalization quotient (aka EQ) and of human brain evolution, see our previous episodes here and here. 15:00 – The classic paper on the “expensive tissue hypothesis.” 22:00 – An article about the role of meat in human evolution; an article about the role of tubers. The cooking hypothesis is most strongly associated with Richard Wrangham and his book, Catching Fire.  26:00 – A recent article on evidence for the widespread control of fire in human groups by around 400,000 years ago. 31:30 – A paper on how fermenting cassava reduces its toxicity. 38:30 – There have been various claims in the ethnographic literature that the control of fire has been lost among small groups, such as in Tasmania. See footnote 2 in this article. 44:30 – A popular article about kiviaq.  45:00 – The article from the New Yorker, by Rebecca Mead, about the foodways of the Faroe Islands.  53:00 – For more discussion of the so-called drunken monkey hypothesis, see our previous episode about intoxication.   1:00:30 – A popular article about hákarl, which is fermented Greenland shark.   Recommendations The Botany of Desire, by Michael Pollan The Art of Fermentation, by Sandor Katz Wild Fermentation, by Sandor Katz “How humans evolved large brains,” by Karin Isler & Carel van Schaik   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com.  For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

The tree of life is a noisy place. From one branch come hoots and howls, from another come clicks and buzzes and whines. And coming from all over you hear the swell of song. But what is all this ruckus about? Why do so many animals communicate with sound? What kinds of meaning do these sounds convey? And—beyond the case of human speech—do any of these sounds merit the label of “language”? My guest today is Dr. Arik Kershenbaum, a zoologist at Cambridge University. Arik is an expert on vocal communication across the animal kingdom and the author of the recent book Why animals talk: The new science of animal communication. Here, Arik and I talk about why the acoustic medium is a popular choice for complex communication. We sketch a key difference between forms of communication that are purely expressive and forms that are also referential. We discuss, in turn, Arik's field research on wolves, hyraxes, and gibbons—and talk about what makes each of these animals such a revealing case study. We evaluate our prospects for quote unquote "translating" different kinds of animal communication, and we speculate about what communication systems could look like on other planets. Along the way, Arik and I touch on: noisy versus tonal sounds; short-range versus long-range communication; chorusing and duetting; simplicity and complexity; syntax and meaning; entropy; alarm calls; dolphins, orcas, and cuttlefish; and how you can tell that wolves take a certain pleasure in howling. Without further ado, here’s my chat with Dr. Arik Kershenbaum.   A transcript of this episode is available here.    Notes and links 6:30 – In the human case, of course, our most elaborated form of communication—language—comes in both spoken and signed forms. For more on the different modalities of human language, see, e.g., our earlier episode with Dr. Neil Cohn. 7:30 – The distinction between expressive and referential communication is perhaps most strongly associated with the linguist Roman Jakobson—see, for instance, this essay. For more on the question of whether animal communication systems involve reference, see this recent (philosophical) discussion. 9:00 – For a classic example of work on predator alarm calls in vervet monkeys, see here.  13:00 – For an example of Dr. Kershenbaum’s work on wolf (and other canid) howls, see here. The study provides evidence for howling “dialects.”  24:30 – An example of coyote chorusing can be heard here. 27:00 – A study showing that human listeners overestimate the size of a coyote group. 29:00 – For an example of Dr. Kershenbaum’s work on hyrax song, see here. An example of hyrax song can be heard here.  34:00 – For a primer on syntax in animal acoustic communication, see here.  40:00 – Examples of gibbon song can be heard here and here.  45:00 – For a paper on the syntax and complexity of gibbon songs, see here.  48:30 – A paper by Dr. Kershenbaum and colleagues on entropy and Zipf’s law in animal communication.  57:30 – A paper on Darwin’s theory of “musical protolanguage.” 59:30 – An example of research on orca communication.  1:00:00 – For more about Project CETI, see here.  1:07:00 – See Dr. Kershenbaum’s other book, The Zoologist’s Guide to the Galaxy.    Recommendations The Reign of Wolf 21, by Rick McIntyre Through a window, by Jane Goodall   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com.  For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

Evolution is not what it used to be. A lot has changed since Darwin's day. In the first half of the 20th century, evolutionary theory was integrated with an emerging understanding of genetics. Late in the 20th century, biologists started taking seriously the idea that organisms don't just adapt to their environments, they change them. Recently, researchers have started to acknowledge the role of culture in evolutionary processes. And so slowly our understanding of evolution has been reconsidered, updated, expanded. And more updates are underway. But it's not just our understanding of evolution that has changed over time. Evolution itself has changed, too. My guest today is Dr. Kevin Lala. Kevin is an evolutionary biologist at the University of St Andrews in Scotland. Over his long career, Kevin has been at the forefront of key debates about—and updates to—evolutionary theory. He's known, for instance, for his pioneering work on niche construction as well as for his work on gene-culture co-evolution. In a new book titled Evolution Evolving, Kevin and his four co-authors present a new synthesis of evolution, one that places developmental processes front and center. Here, Kevin and I sketch the notion of a "developmental bias" and why it's central to this new understanding of evolution. We talk about the orthodox gene-centric way of thinking about development—and what it gets wrong. We discuss so-called exploratory processes in development. We dig into the increasingly popular, but much debated construct of "evolvability." And we consider what this newest update to evolutionary theory might tell us about the origins of human cognition. Along the way, Kevin and I talk about floppy ears in mammals and fragmented faces in fish; symbionts and soft inheritance; Mary Jane West-Eberhard, Richard Lewontin, and August Weismann; development as an artist and evolution as curator; maps; plants; manual dexterity; brain size; and why evolution is a bit like walking on a trampoline. A final reminder about the 2025 Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, or DISI. DISI is a three-week long summer institute held in St Andrews, Scotland; it's a place for the wide-ranging, transdisciplinary exploration of ideas about mind, cognition, and intelligence. It's a place where early career scholars get to hobnob with thinkers like Kevin Lala, who was a faculty member with us in 2019. There's still time to apply, but do act fast—review of applications begins March 1st.   Alright friends, on to my conversation with Dr. Kevin Lala. Enjoy!   A transcript of this episode is available here.   Notes and links 4:00 – A paper describing so-called domestication syndrome. For more on domestication (and self-domestication), see our earlier episode with Dr. Brian Hare. 11:00 – A paper describing cavefish as a new model organism in the study of evolution and development. 15:00 – An influential 2015 paper, led by Dr. Lala, describing the “extended evolutionary synthesis.” 22:00 – A 2016 overview of niche construction theory, led by Dr. Lala. 27:00 – An early report on “lobtail feeding” in humpback whales. 33:00 – A paper describing “gaping behavior” in cichlid fishes. 35:00 – A review of “soft inheritance.” The study showing that mice pass on learned associations to offspring. 41:00 – A study on the gut microbes that allow woodrats to digest toxic creosote. 44:00 – See our earlier episode with Dr. Eric Turkheimer. 50:00 – See Winther’s book, When Maps Become the World. 56:00 – A paper reviewing the idea of “exploratory mechanisms” in development, as well as other ideas associated with the concept of “plasticity-led evolution.” 1:05:00 – A classic paper on the notion of “evolvability.” 1:13:00 – For one example of a “major transitions” framework, see our earlier episode with Dr. Andrew Barron. 1:17:00 – A news article about how dogs developed the ability to digest starch, initially by acquiring symbionts. 1:20:00 – For discussion of the evolution of human brain size, see our earlier episode ‘Fermentation, fire, and our big brains.’ 1:28:00 – A recent review of the idea that humans are “self-domesticated.”   Recommendations Developmental Plasticity and Evolution, by Mary Jane West-Eberhard   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com.  For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).