1 00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:03,080 Speaker 1: What if the very fabric of your perceived world, the 2 00:00:03,120 --> 00:00:05,639 colors you see, the sounds you hear, even the space 3 00:00:05,719 --> 00:00:08,759 around you, isn't quite what you think it is. It's 4 00:00:08,759 --> 00:00:12,080 a question that can really, uh make your brain to 5 00:00:12,160 --> 00:00:14,000 a backflip, isn't it. We all wake up, we look around, 6 00:00:14,000 --> 00:00:17,480 and we just assume what we're seeing is well, yeah, 7 00:00:17,640 --> 00:00:21,320 exactly as we see it, you know, an unblemished, direct 8 00:00:21,399 --> 00:00:24,480 reflection of objective truth. Well what if that's not the 9 00:00:24,519 --> 00:00:26,559 case at all? What if your brain is in fact 10 00:00:26,679 --> 00:00:31,320 an incredible personal reality generator shaping everything you experience. 11 00:00:31,640 --> 00:00:34,880 Speaker 2: It's a profound thought, yeah, and it's one that neuroscience 12 00:00:34,920 --> 00:00:38,880 and cognitive science are increasingly reinforcing with well some pretty 13 00:00:38,880 --> 00:00:43,039 compelling evidence. Our senses well undeniably powerful and, let's face it, 14 00:00:43,159 --> 00:00:46,799 utterly essential for navigating our lives. They aren't passive recorders 15 00:00:46,799 --> 00:00:49,479 of an external world, like some perfect high fidelity camera 16 00:00:49,560 --> 00:00:51,000 or microphone. That's just not how they work. 17 00:00:51,079 --> 00:00:52,640 Speaker 1: Okay, not like a camera. So what are they like? 18 00:00:52,679 --> 00:00:56,759 Speaker 2: Then? They're more like sophisticated active constructors, almost illusionist. You 19 00:00:56,759 --> 00:01:00,520 could say. They're creating a personalized version of reality that 20 00:01:00,560 --> 00:01:06,239 serves a very specific, vital purpose. It's designed for our 21 00:01:06,280 --> 00:01:09,879 survival and successful interaction with the world, rather than presenting 22 00:01:09,920 --> 00:01:14,799 a literal, unmediated, objective truth h illutionists. Okay, so this 23 00:01:14,840 --> 00:01:21,439 sets up a fascinating paradox. Right, the world feels undeniably real, solid, external, 24 00:01:21,840 --> 00:01:25,959 yet our direct access to it is always filtered, interpreted, 25 00:01:26,040 --> 00:01:29,000 and profoundly constructed internally. 26 00:01:29,079 --> 00:01:32,200 Speaker 1: Okay, let's unpack this because that statement alone is well, 27 00:01:32,239 --> 00:01:34,319 it's a seismic shift in how many of us think 28 00:01:34,319 --> 00:01:38,640 about our daily experience. It fundamentally challenges our most basic assumptions. 29 00:01:38,840 --> 00:01:39,519 Speaker 2: It really does. 30 00:01:39,799 --> 00:01:43,280 Speaker 1: Today we're diving deep into precisely that understanding how our 31 00:01:43,319 --> 00:01:47,120 senses actively construct the reality we inhabit. We'll explore in 32 00:01:47,200 --> 00:01:49,760 detail why this construction is not just some fascinating trick 33 00:01:49,799 --> 00:01:52,920 of the mind, but something absolutely vital for our survival, 34 00:01:52,959 --> 00:01:55,400 for our very existence, and then we'll get into what 35 00:01:55,439 --> 00:01:58,359 this profound insight means for how we approach truth, knowledge, 36 00:01:58,879 --> 00:02:01,760 our relationships, and our daily interactions with the world around us. 37 00:02:01,840 --> 00:02:03,920 Speaker 2: Yeah, the implications are pretty far reaching. 38 00:02:04,120 --> 00:02:06,200 Speaker 1: Our mission for you today is to walk away with 39 00:02:06,280 --> 00:02:10,400 a fresh, powerful perspective on how you perceive everything. Think 40 00:02:10,400 --> 00:02:12,759 of it as a shortcut to being truly well informed 41 00:02:12,800 --> 00:02:16,759 about a concept that honestly reshapes fundamental understanding. It's going 42 00:02:16,800 --> 00:02:19,240 to be an illuminating, maybe even a little mind bending 43 00:02:19,319 --> 00:02:21,240 deep dive. So let's jump in. 44 00:02:22,639 --> 00:02:26,560 Speaker 2: So let's start with what feels like an undeniable foundational truth, 45 00:02:27,360 --> 00:02:30,919 the existence of an external physical world. It seems utterly obvious, 46 00:02:30,960 --> 00:02:34,560 doesn't it. Trees, buildings, other people, they exist independently of 47 00:02:34,639 --> 00:02:37,199 us looking at them. The sun is shining, whether I'm 48 00:02:37,199 --> 00:02:38,000 awake or asleep. 49 00:02:38,159 --> 00:02:40,719 Speaker 1: Absolutely, and that's the very first thing we need to clarify, 50 00:02:40,759 --> 00:02:43,800 and it's a crucial anchor point for this entire discussion. Yes, 51 00:02:43,879 --> 00:02:47,680 an external physical world absolutely exists. There's no serious debate 52 00:02:47,680 --> 00:02:51,080 there among scientists or well most philosophers who approach this 53 00:02:51,080 --> 00:02:54,159 from an empirical perspective. The world is real. The sun 54 00:02:54,240 --> 00:02:56,520 is real, the moon is real, the ground beneath your 55 00:02:56,520 --> 00:02:59,879 feet is real. The atoms that compose them are objectively 56 00:03:00,400 --> 00:03:01,280 real entities. 57 00:03:01,360 --> 00:03:03,360 Speaker 2: Okay, good, So we're not saying nothing is real, not 58 00:03:03,439 --> 00:03:07,879 at all. What's revolutionary here, and what our sources consistently highlight, 59 00:03:08,360 --> 00:03:11,240 is the understanding that while it exists, we do not, 60 00:03:11,879 --> 00:03:14,800 and in fact, we cannot perceive it as it truly 61 00:03:14,919 --> 00:03:19,680 is our access to that objective external reality is entirely indirect. 62 00:03:19,759 --> 00:03:23,719 It's always mediating, mediated by by our incredibly complex and 63 00:03:23,800 --> 00:03:28,719 highly specialized sensory systems and crucially the cognitive processes of 64 00:03:28,759 --> 00:03:29,199 our brain. 65 00:03:29,639 --> 00:03:32,919 Speaker 1: And that's where the profound disconnect begins. Because our common assumption, 66 00:03:33,039 --> 00:03:36,400 the intuitive everyday belief, is that our eyes are just 67 00:03:36,400 --> 00:03:40,319 like perfect digital cameras taking an unblemish snapshot, or our 68 00:03:40,360 --> 00:03:44,560 ears are simply high fidelity microphones recording exact sound waves. 69 00:03:45,120 --> 00:03:48,080 But you're saying that's fundamentally not true. We're not passive recorder. 70 00:03:48,159 --> 00:03:51,759 Speaker 2: Precisely, that's the core misunderstanding. Our senses do, of course 71 00:03:51,800 --> 00:03:54,800 receive data from the physical world lightweight sound, vibrations, chemical 72 00:03:54,840 --> 00:03:57,680 molecules and the physical stuff. But the crucial point, and 73 00:03:57,680 --> 00:04:00,000 this is where the magic and the mystery of perception 74 00:04:00,039 --> 00:04:03,520 and truly lie, is that our brains don't just passively 75 00:04:03,599 --> 00:04:07,840 receive this raw input. They actively conflate multiple aspects of 76 00:04:07,879 --> 00:04:12,719 that physical world. Conflate, meaning they combine or sometimes confuse 77 00:04:12,919 --> 00:04:17,680 distinct elements into one single perception. Our sensory systems don't 78 00:04:17,720 --> 00:04:21,079 just transmit data like a wire. They process, filter, and 79 00:04:21,160 --> 00:04:25,879 inherently blend different pieces of information, which means our perceptions 80 00:04:25,959 --> 00:04:29,959 are not accurate one to one representations of objective reality. 81 00:04:30,399 --> 00:04:32,319 It's not just a matter whether we see the world 82 00:04:32,360 --> 00:04:34,800 as it truly is, it's whether we even see it 83 00:04:34,920 --> 00:04:39,079 accurately in terms of its distinct components. And the answers no, 84 00:04:39,560 --> 00:04:42,720 And the answer, based on the very mechanisms of perception 85 00:04:43,079 --> 00:04:46,040 seems to be a resounding no. We don't. We see 86 00:04:46,079 --> 00:04:50,279 a highly processed, highly useful, but inherently non literal version. 87 00:04:50,399 --> 00:04:53,120 Speaker 1: It's an interpretation that's a huge claim. It feels so 88 00:04:53,160 --> 00:04:56,519 counterintuitive because everything looks so real, so distinct. Give us 89 00:04:56,519 --> 00:04:58,360 an example to really bring this home, to make us 90 00:04:58,399 --> 00:05:01,319 feel the paradox. What is it truly mean to see 91 00:05:01,399 --> 00:05:04,079 much more than is visible? If visibility is just what 92 00:05:04,160 --> 00:05:06,160 projects to our eyes, how can we see something that's 93 00:05:06,199 --> 00:05:08,240 not there or miss something that is. 94 00:05:08,680 --> 00:05:12,040 Speaker 2: It is a paradox, isn't it one that constantly challenges 95 00:05:12,040 --> 00:05:17,000 our assumptions? Okay, consider this classic illustration. Imagine you walk 96 00:05:17,040 --> 00:05:19,120 into a room and there's a piece of graffiti on 97 00:05:19,160 --> 00:05:22,839 the wall. Let's say, for argument's sake, it contains words 98 00:05:22,879 --> 00:05:25,560 or symbols that are truly offensive to you. Maybe a 99 00:05:25,600 --> 00:05:29,120 hateful slur. You look at it, and immediately you might 100 00:05:29,199 --> 00:05:31,959 feel a flush of anger. Your heart starts to race, 101 00:05:32,000 --> 00:05:35,879 your body language shifts. You're outraged, completely taken aback. You 102 00:05:35,920 --> 00:05:36,319 see the. 103 00:05:36,279 --> 00:05:40,360 Speaker 1: Offense, right, I can picture that a visceral reaction exactly. 104 00:05:40,680 --> 00:05:43,000 Speaker 2: Now, imagine if you were from a culture or spoke 105 00:05:43,000 --> 00:05:46,600 a language in which that graffiti was utterly meaningless, just shapes, 106 00:05:46,759 --> 00:05:50,160 no content. You would have had the exact same retinal events, 107 00:05:50,399 --> 00:05:52,959 the light hitting your eyes, the same patterns of pixels 108 00:05:52,959 --> 00:05:55,360 and colors forming on your retina, the same urge of 109 00:05:55,439 --> 00:06:00,279 visual system activity, but without any corresponding emotional, intellectual, or 110 00:06:00,279 --> 00:06:04,680 indeed offensive reaction. The Humpsten's wasn't on the wall was 111 00:06:04,720 --> 00:06:06,319 constructed by your interpretation. 112 00:06:06,600 --> 00:06:09,519 Speaker 1: Oh that makes so much visceral sense. I can totally 113 00:06:09,560 --> 00:06:11,560 relate to that. And it's not just about language, is it. 114 00:06:11,600 --> 00:06:14,199 I remember I was once hiking in some dense woods, 115 00:06:14,240 --> 00:06:17,040 pretty deep in, and I saw what I swore was 116 00:06:17,040 --> 00:06:20,120 a person lurking behind a thick tree, just out of sight. 117 00:06:20,600 --> 00:06:23,000 My heart pounded, I felt this jolt of fear, every 118 00:06:23,040 --> 00:06:26,839 instinct screened threat. I froze trying to make out details. 119 00:06:26,839 --> 00:06:28,480 My brain just filling in the gaps. 120 00:06:28,560 --> 00:06:30,639 Speaker 2: You know, yeah, fight or flight kicks in totally. 121 00:06:31,279 --> 00:06:33,879 Speaker 1: Then, as I slowly moved to get a clearer angle, 122 00:06:34,040 --> 00:06:37,120 heart still hammering, I realized it was just a strangely 123 00:06:37,160 --> 00:06:41,199 shaped moss covered rock. The light, the shadows, my own 124 00:06:41,480 --> 00:06:44,920 maybe expectation of seeing something in the quiet woods all 125 00:06:44,959 --> 00:06:47,439 contributed to my brain constructing a person where there was 126 00:06:47,480 --> 00:06:51,040 only stone. The external input was ambiguous, but my brain 127 00:06:51,120 --> 00:06:53,959 added the threat meaning not just the raw visual data. 128 00:06:54,079 --> 00:06:58,839 The objective input hadn't changed, but my experience did completely exactly. 129 00:06:58,879 --> 00:07:02,279 Speaker 2: That's a perfect example. It demonstrates that much more shows 130 00:07:02,360 --> 00:07:05,639 up for us in our perception than just the raw 131 00:07:05,800 --> 00:07:08,879 sensory data projecting into our nervous system. Our brains aren't 132 00:07:08,920 --> 00:07:13,319 just passively receiving. They are actively interpreting, constructing, and adding 133 00:07:13,399 --> 00:07:16,680 layers of meaning. And this is based on a vast 134 00:07:16,759 --> 00:07:21,439 intricate web of context, prior knowledge, learned expectations, past experiences, 135 00:07:21,639 --> 00:07:26,040 even our current emotional and physiological states. Mood matters right absolutely, 136 00:07:26,199 --> 00:07:28,680 and this isn't a flaw in our system. Quite the opposite. 137 00:07:28,879 --> 00:07:32,600 It's an incredibly efficient and frankly deeply intelligent part of 138 00:07:32,639 --> 00:07:37,000 how our sensory system allows us to navigate a complex, ambiguous, 139 00:07:37,040 --> 00:07:40,199 and often dangerous world. It allows us to derive meaning 140 00:07:40,199 --> 00:07:43,959 from information, not just raw input, and to react instantly 141 00:07:44,000 --> 00:07:44,560 when needed. 142 00:07:44,879 --> 00:07:47,120 Speaker 1: So if our brains are doing all this heavy lifting 143 00:07:47,120 --> 00:07:51,040 of interpretation, taking raw ambiguous data, and actively constructing meaning 144 00:07:51,040 --> 00:07:55,279 and coherent perceptions, then things we consider fundamental truly objective 145 00:07:55,360 --> 00:07:58,079 qualities of objects and experiences might not be what we 146 00:07:58,079 --> 00:08:00,680 think they are. This is where it really gets mind 147 00:08:00,720 --> 00:08:03,240 bending from it, because we feel like we're directly experiencing 148 00:08:03,240 --> 00:08:04,040 the world as it is. 149 00:08:04,120 --> 00:08:07,120 Speaker 2: Right. That's the startling claim, yes, and it's one that 150 00:08:07,160 --> 00:08:11,120 truly challenges our everyday intuition. Our senses are actively making 151 00:08:11,199 --> 00:08:15,279 up experiences like tastes, odors, and colors. These aren't inherent 152 00:08:15,360 --> 00:08:18,600 properties of an objective reality out there just waiting to 153 00:08:18,639 --> 00:08:22,560 be perceived by us. They are, in fact, properties fabricated 154 00:08:22,600 --> 00:08:25,920 by our senses themselves in response to external stimuli. 155 00:08:26,000 --> 00:08:27,720 Speaker 1: Fabricated like made up. 156 00:08:27,759 --> 00:08:31,279 Speaker 2: In a way. Yes, think about it. A strawberry doesn't 157 00:08:31,319 --> 00:08:34,200 inherently have redness in the way a physicists describes it. 158 00:08:34,200 --> 00:08:36,960 It reflects certain wavelengths of light. Right, that's the physics. 159 00:08:37,480 --> 00:08:40,639 Your brain then interports those wavelengths and creases the subjective 160 00:08:40,679 --> 00:08:44,240 experience of red. The redness happens in your head, not 161 00:08:44,360 --> 00:08:45,200 in the strawberry. 162 00:08:45,240 --> 00:08:47,600 Speaker 1: WHOA okay, hold on. So when I bite into a 163 00:08:47,639 --> 00:08:51,039 perfectly ripe strawberry and taste that sweet, juicy flavor, or 164 00:08:51,080 --> 00:08:53,000 when I smell a freshly baked loaf of bread, that 165 00:08:53,039 --> 00:08:56,080 amazing smell, Or when I see a vibrant sunset, all 166 00:08:56,120 --> 00:08:59,799 those oranges and pinks and purples, those sensations that taste, 167 00:08:59,840 --> 00:09:02,559 the smell, the colors are literally creations of my brain. 168 00:09:02,720 --> 00:09:05,039 They're not out there in the strawberry, the bread, or 169 00:09:05,080 --> 00:09:09,200 the sunset itself, existing independently. Here's where it gets really interesting. 170 00:09:09,440 --> 00:09:10,919 Speaker 2: That's the current understanding again and. 171 00:09:10,840 --> 00:09:14,200 Speaker 1: Truly humbling, because it means our subjective experience isn't just 172 00:09:14,240 --> 00:09:18,399 a faint echo of reality, but this vibrant internal symphony 173 00:09:18,440 --> 00:09:21,960 that our brains are composing moment by moment. What does 174 00:09:21,960 --> 00:09:25,279 this reveal about why we find certain colors or smells 175 00:09:25,360 --> 00:09:29,519 universally appealing maybe, or why they can evoke such powerful 176 00:09:29,600 --> 00:09:32,080 memories and emotions. Is that part of the construction. 177 00:09:32,039 --> 00:09:35,120 Speaker 2: Precisely, and to clarify it, when we talk about objective 178 00:09:35,159 --> 00:09:38,519 reality here we mean what Most physicists would define it 179 00:09:38,559 --> 00:09:42,080 as something that would continue to exist with its properties intact, 180 00:09:42,440 --> 00:09:45,399 even if no conscious creature were there to perceive it. 181 00:09:45,919 --> 00:09:49,759 The strawberry itself, it's complex molecular structure, its physical form, 182 00:09:49,840 --> 00:09:55,039 its chemical composition. That's objectively real. A spectrometer, a scientific instrument, 183 00:09:55,159 --> 00:09:57,720 would detect the same wavelengths of light reflecting from it, 184 00:09:57,879 --> 00:10:01,440 regardless of an observer. That's the objective part. But the 185 00:10:01,480 --> 00:10:04,000 taste of the strawberry, the color of its red hue, 186 00:10:04,039 --> 00:10:06,639 the odor of the bread, these are not objective properties 187 00:10:06,679 --> 00:10:07,200 in that sense. 188 00:10:07,200 --> 00:10:07,960 Speaker 1: They need a perceiver. 189 00:10:08,240 --> 00:10:11,840 Speaker 2: They need a perceiver their subjective experiences, often referred to 190 00:10:11,879 --> 00:10:16,480 as qualia and philosophy the subjective qualitative properties of experiences. 191 00:10:17,240 --> 00:10:20,279 The stunning insight is that our brains generate these qualia. 192 00:10:21,000 --> 00:10:24,519 What's fascinating here is that while your experience of red 193 00:10:24,600 --> 00:10:28,120 is unique to you, our shared human physiology means there's 194 00:10:28,159 --> 00:10:31,200 often a commonality in how we construct these experiences that 195 00:10:31,320 --> 00:10:34,519 leads to phenomena like perhaps the universal appeal of certain 196 00:10:34,600 --> 00:10:40,000 esthetics or common emotional responses to certain stimuli. But subtle 197 00:10:40,039 --> 00:10:41,320 differences exist too. 198 00:10:41,399 --> 00:10:43,519 Speaker 1: Like how some people hate cilantro because it tastes like 199 00:10:43,600 --> 00:10:44,399 soap to them. 200 00:10:44,320 --> 00:10:48,799 Speaker 2: Exactly, or differences in how people perceive certain colors, or 201 00:10:48,840 --> 00:10:53,320 the varying sensitivity of supertasters to specific flavors. Your brain's 202 00:10:53,360 --> 00:10:56,879 construction is uniquely yours, even if it shares broad strokes 203 00:10:56,879 --> 00:10:57,399 with others. 204 00:10:57,600 --> 00:10:59,639 Speaker 1: Okay, but if they're not objectively real, does that mean 205 00:10:59,639 --> 00:11:02,840 they're not at all? That seems to contradict my fundamental 206 00:11:02,879 --> 00:11:05,879 everyday experience. My headache is definitely real to me, even 207 00:11:05,919 --> 00:11:07,919 if it's not out there for someone else to pick 208 00:11:07,960 --> 00:11:11,399 up or for a machine to measure directly outside my skull. 209 00:11:11,600 --> 00:11:13,000 It feels pretty real. 210 00:11:13,279 --> 00:11:15,879 Speaker 2: That's a crucial distinction, and a really important one to grasp. 211 00:11:16,120 --> 00:11:19,360 You're absolutely right. While they are not objectively real in 212 00:11:19,399 --> 00:11:23,000 the physicist's sense, meaning they don't exist independent of a 213 00:11:23,000 --> 00:11:28,200 conscious observer, these fabrications are absolutely real experiences for the 214 00:11:28,240 --> 00:11:32,639 conscious observer. Your headache is a perfect example. It's a real, 215 00:11:32,879 --> 00:11:36,679 often intensely painful experience for you, even though it could 216 00:11:36,679 --> 00:11:39,799 not exist without you perceiving it. So it exists in 217 00:11:39,840 --> 00:11:42,240 a different way than say, the desk in front of 218 00:11:42,279 --> 00:11:44,879 you or the atoms making it up. It highlights that 219 00:11:44,879 --> 00:11:47,840 there are different kinds of real. Our perceptions are real 220 00:11:47,840 --> 00:11:50,679 to us. They have real consequences for our actions and emotions, 221 00:11:51,080 --> 00:11:54,600 even if they aren't literal, exact mirrors of the external world. 222 00:11:54,679 --> 00:11:55,639 They are the interface. 223 00:11:55,759 --> 00:11:57,840 Speaker 1: So the interface. I like that, okay, But I think 224 00:11:57,840 --> 00:11:59,399 the most mind blowing part of this, the part that 225 00:11:59,480 --> 00:12:03,200 genuinely makes you rethink everything, is that it doesn't stop 226 00:12:03,240 --> 00:12:06,840 at just tastes, odors and colors which we might perhaps 227 00:12:06,960 --> 00:12:10,000 grudgingly accept as being somewhat subjective, even if they feel 228 00:12:10,000 --> 00:12:12,919 so vivid. You're saying, it goes even deeper, much deeper, 229 00:12:12,960 --> 00:12:15,159 to the very fabric of existence itself. 230 00:12:15,399 --> 00:12:18,240 Speaker 2: Indeed, it was quite a stunning shock, I think, for 231 00:12:18,320 --> 00:12:21,720 many researchers and philosophers to realize that the fabrications of 232 00:12:21,759 --> 00:12:25,320 our senses extend far beyond what we call qualiya. While 233 00:12:25,320 --> 00:12:28,039 the debate around the nature of quality itself is complex 234 00:12:28,080 --> 00:12:31,360 and philosophy of mind, the truly profound revelation is that 235 00:12:31,480 --> 00:12:35,080 space time itself, and everything we perceive within space time, 236 00:12:35,240 --> 00:12:38,000 all the objects we interact with, from planets down to 237 00:12:38,039 --> 00:12:41,399 tiny particles like electrons and quarks, the Sun, the moon, 238 00:12:41,480 --> 00:12:44,840 their shapes, their masses, their velocities, all of these fundamental 239 00:12:44,879 --> 00:12:48,519 physical properties are also constructions of our senses. They are 240 00:12:48,519 --> 00:12:50,679 part of the user interface our brains create. 241 00:12:50,840 --> 00:12:54,519 Speaker 1: Whoa okay, space time, the three dimensions we move in 242 00:12:54,759 --> 00:12:56,279 plus time that's constructed. 243 00:12:56,440 --> 00:12:59,440 Speaker 2: That's the implication of some serious theoretical work. Yeah, it's 244 00:12:59,480 --> 00:13:01,960 a representation of format our consciousness uses. 245 00:13:02,360 --> 00:13:05,399 Speaker 1: So what does this all mean? The very ground beneath 246 00:13:05,440 --> 00:13:07,679 my feet, the solid desk in front of me, the 247 00:13:07,720 --> 00:13:12,679 screen I'm looking at. It's all a grand internal simulation 248 00:13:12,879 --> 00:13:15,759 set the right word. My brain is receiving data that 249 00:13:15,840 --> 00:13:19,799 to it is inherently meaningless in its raw form, just signals, 250 00:13:20,720 --> 00:13:24,320 and it's fabricating this coherent, solid, stable world for me. 251 00:13:24,519 --> 00:13:26,759 Speaker 2: It's incredibly hard to wrap your head around because when 252 00:13:26,799 --> 00:13:29,600 I open my eyes, I see everything. It feels incredibly 253 00:13:29,600 --> 00:13:32,879 meaningful and real, incredibly solid. It doesn't feel like a fabrication. 254 00:13:33,120 --> 00:13:35,679 Speaker 1: And that's precisely the common misconception and the source of 255 00:13:35,720 --> 00:13:39,080 our powerful intuition. It feels real because it needs to 256 00:13:39,159 --> 00:13:41,559 feel real for us to interact with it effectively. People 257 00:13:41,600 --> 00:13:43,720 open their eyes, they look around and they say, well, 258 00:13:43,759 --> 00:13:45,879 I see everything. What do you mean it's meaningless data? 259 00:13:46,320 --> 00:13:50,120 But consider this, Your retina detects photon's tiny packets of 260 00:13:50,200 --> 00:13:54,159 light energy arriving at various wavelengths and intensities. That raw data, 261 00:13:54,279 --> 00:13:58,200 it's just energy striking a surface, triggering electrochemical signals in neurons. 262 00:13:58,200 --> 00:14:01,919 Speaker 2: It's electrical signals signal that data has no inherent meaning 263 00:14:02,039 --> 00:14:05,559 of red or apple, or solid or three dimensional space 264 00:14:05,840 --> 00:14:09,120 until the brain processes and constructs it. It's a cascade 265 00:14:09,159 --> 00:14:13,000 of electrical impulses and chemical exchanges. In isolation, a single 266 00:14:13,039 --> 00:14:16,840 neuron firing means practically nothing in terms of perception. But 267 00:14:16,919 --> 00:14:21,200 the brain, through millions billions of years of evolution, has 268 00:14:21,240 --> 00:14:25,600 developed incredibly sophisticated algorithms like software kind of yeah, algorithms 269 00:14:25,600 --> 00:14:29,720 to take that vast, complex, meaningless raw input and sculpt 270 00:14:29,799 --> 00:14:32,759 it into a coherent perception. Think of your brain not 271 00:14:32,799 --> 00:14:35,879 as a perfect camera recording external reality, but as an 272 00:14:35,879 --> 00:14:39,960 incredibly sophisticated virtual reality engine constantly running in real time. 273 00:14:40,240 --> 00:14:43,519 Creates a usable, consistent, compelling interface that allows you to 274 00:14:43,559 --> 00:14:44,919 interact with the world efficiently. 275 00:14:45,000 --> 00:14:47,960 Speaker 1: Like the desktop on a computer, icons and folders instead 276 00:14:47,960 --> 00:14:48,720 of raw code. 277 00:14:48,879 --> 00:14:51,960 Speaker 2: That's a great analogy exactly the operating system gives you 278 00:14:52,240 --> 00:14:55,919 icons and folders to manage complex abstract underlying code you 279 00:14:56,000 --> 00:15:00,159 never see. Our perception is like that desktop, this interface, 280 00:15:00,279 --> 00:15:04,200 this perceived reality is what allows us to function and survive. 281 00:15:04,519 --> 00:15:08,000 It's a simulation, yes, but one that is exquisitely designed 282 00:15:08,159 --> 00:15:09,039 for your survival. 283 00:15:09,519 --> 00:15:12,720 Speaker 1: This brings us to a really fascinating point. If our 284 00:15:12,759 --> 00:15:16,440 perceptions aren't literally true to objective reality, if they are 285 00:15:16,480 --> 00:15:19,720 in fact constructions and even fabrications, why are they the 286 00:15:19,720 --> 00:15:23,320 way they are? It seems incredibly counterintuitive for evolution to 287 00:15:23,320 --> 00:15:26,039 give us an inaccurate view of the world. Surely the 288 00:15:26,080 --> 00:15:28,679 most accurate view would be the most beneficial for survival. 289 00:15:28,919 --> 00:15:33,360 Speaker 2: Ah. But that's where the evolutionary brilliance and frankly economy 290 00:15:33,360 --> 00:15:37,279 come in. It turns out accuracy can be computationally expensive 291 00:15:37,279 --> 00:15:41,480 and slow. Our perceptions aren't designed for literal, scientific truth 292 00:15:41,519 --> 00:15:44,320 in all its minute detail. They're designed for utility. 293 00:15:44,480 --> 00:15:47,440 Speaker 1: They're shortcuts, utility over accuracy. 294 00:15:47,240 --> 00:15:50,519 Speaker 2: Utility over accuracy. They are designed to provide us with 295 00:15:50,559 --> 00:15:54,879 the information we need just enough, quickly enough to survive 296 00:15:54,919 --> 00:15:58,480 and thrive, not to render objective truth in its entirety. 297 00:15:59,120 --> 00:16:03,279 And surprisingly, too much accuracy can sometimes be a hindrance. 298 00:16:03,799 --> 00:16:07,879 It might overwhelm us or slow down crucial decisions. A 299 00:16:07,960 --> 00:16:11,039 really simple and profound example of this is how human 300 00:16:11,080 --> 00:16:14,879 perception handles color compared to how it handles sound. Okay, 301 00:16:14,919 --> 00:16:17,759 color versus sound, How so that sounds intriguing? 302 00:16:17,960 --> 00:16:21,039 Speaker 1: Well? Consider sound first. When you have two pure tones 303 00:16:21,080 --> 00:16:23,720 played together, like a middle C and a G above 304 00:16:23,759 --> 00:16:26,919 it a musical fifth, right, you hear that chord the blend, 305 00:16:27,159 --> 00:16:30,399 But critically, you can also distinctly hear the separate tones, 306 00:16:30,440 --> 00:16:32,879 the C and the G, even though they're played together. 307 00:16:32,799 --> 00:16:34,960 Speaker 2: Right, You can pick them out if you listen closely exactly. 308 00:16:35,080 --> 00:16:38,759 Speaker 1: Your brain preserves those individual identities, allowing you to appreciate 309 00:16:38,799 --> 00:16:41,440 both the harmony and the distinct notes within it. It's 310 00:16:41,440 --> 00:16:44,519 like hearing two separate voices blending, but still being able 311 00:16:44,559 --> 00:16:45,720 to distinguish each one. 312 00:16:45,960 --> 00:16:48,679 Speaker 2: Right, You hear both the choral harmony and the individual notes. 313 00:16:49,039 --> 00:16:53,200 That's fundamental to music, to understanding harmony exactly. Now, compare 314 00:16:53,240 --> 00:16:56,679 that to colors. If you take two different pure spectral colors, 315 00:16:56,679 --> 00:16:59,639 say a specific wavelength of green light and a specific 316 00:16:59,679 --> 00:17:02,679 wavefe length of red light, and you mix them, meaning 317 00:17:02,919 --> 00:17:07,680 you send both those wavelengths into your eye simultaneously, what 318 00:17:07,720 --> 00:17:10,119 you see is not a blend where you can discern 319 00:17:10,160 --> 00:17:13,720 the distinct identities of green and red preserved within the mix. 320 00:17:14,039 --> 00:17:14,720 Speaker 1: What do you see then? 321 00:17:15,119 --> 00:17:20,160 Speaker 2: Instead, your brain construct a completely new intermediate color. In fact, 322 00:17:20,160 --> 00:17:22,799 with spectral red and green, you'll typically see something that 323 00:17:22,839 --> 00:17:25,880 looks like yellow. The individual components, the greenness and the 324 00:17:25,920 --> 00:17:28,640 redness of the original lights are lost in the perception. 325 00:17:28,759 --> 00:17:29,480 You just see yellow. 326 00:17:29,519 --> 00:17:32,480 Speaker 1: That's mind blowing. So our brains are literally editing reality 327 00:17:32,759 --> 00:17:35,720 to make it more digestible and useful. It's as if 328 00:17:35,759 --> 00:17:37,759 in music, when you play a C and a G together, 329 00:17:37,920 --> 00:17:40,000 instead of hearing that rich core where you can still 330 00:17:40,039 --> 00:17:42,079 pick out the C ANDNG, you just heard the no 331 00:17:42,240 --> 00:17:46,240 E maybe the intermediate note, and the C ANDNG completely vanished. 332 00:17:46,400 --> 00:17:49,640 We lose the distinct components and get a blended, simplified 333 00:17:49,680 --> 00:17:52,119 result that isn't true to the original inputs. 334 00:17:52,359 --> 00:17:55,079 Speaker 2: That's a perfect analogy. It illustrates it at this most 335 00:17:55,079 --> 00:17:58,599 basic level. We often don't represent the information we're getting 336 00:17:58,680 --> 00:18:02,880 an objectively acttion way, preserving all components. We blend it, 337 00:18:03,240 --> 00:18:07,119 we simplify it, we discard unnecessary detail. And the reason 338 00:18:07,240 --> 00:18:10,559 is precisely because it was useful evolutionarily to perceive it 339 00:18:10,599 --> 00:18:13,839 this way. What you are perceiving is the utility of 340 00:18:13,880 --> 00:18:16,079 the data, not the raw data itself. 341 00:18:16,279 --> 00:18:19,240 Speaker 1: How is seeing yellow more useful than seeing red and green? 342 00:18:19,480 --> 00:18:22,559 Speaker 2: Well, For instance, in our evolutionary history, being able to 343 00:18:22,640 --> 00:18:25,640 quickly identify a ripe fruit, which might reflect a complex 344 00:18:25,720 --> 00:18:29,240 mix of wavelengths as simply yellow or red was likely 345 00:18:29,279 --> 00:18:31,319 far more useful for making a quick eat or don't 346 00:18:31,319 --> 00:18:35,319 eat decision than having to consciously analyze and distinguish every 347 00:18:35,400 --> 00:18:38,319 single wavelength component making up that color. It's about speed 348 00:18:38,359 --> 00:18:41,279 and efficiency for survival. Make a quick judgment, act on it. 349 00:18:41,440 --> 00:18:45,400 Speaker 1: That's incredibly powerful. I've definitely had moments where good enough 350 00:18:45,440 --> 00:18:49,400 information or even a slightly inaccurate but rapid assessment, was 351 00:18:49,440 --> 00:18:52,799 far more valuable than perfect information in a quick decision 352 00:18:53,240 --> 00:18:56,519 like driving. You mentioned that perperal vision thing. Seeing a 353 00:18:56,559 --> 00:19:01,000 flash of movement, my brain instantly processes it as potential 354 00:19:01,039 --> 00:19:04,039 hazard and I instinctively hit the brake, even if it 355 00:19:04,039 --> 00:19:05,920 turns out to be just a plastic bag blowing in 356 00:19:05,960 --> 00:19:09,240 the wind. The speed of the simplified processing the hazard 357 00:19:09,279 --> 00:19:12,720 label was the key to safety, not a precise identification 358 00:19:12,759 --> 00:19:16,279 of a bag versus an animal. My brain prioritized action 359 00:19:16,440 --> 00:19:18,519 over perfect categorization exactly. 360 00:19:18,640 --> 00:19:20,720 Speaker 2: That's not a bug in our system. It's arguably the 361 00:19:20,720 --> 00:19:25,400 most critical feature. Evolution by natural selection has profoundly shaped us, 362 00:19:25,640 --> 00:19:28,799 pruning and refining our sensory systems over millennia, leading to 363 00:19:28,839 --> 00:19:31,839 perceptions that are designed first and foremost to keep us 364 00:19:31,839 --> 00:19:35,039 alive and enable us to reproduce. It's a game of survival, 365 00:19:35,240 --> 00:19:39,000 not a quest for absolute, literal, objective truth in every detail. 366 00:19:39,279 --> 00:19:41,799 Speaker 1: So the famous examples always come up. If you see 367 00:19:41,839 --> 00:19:43,599 a snake, don't pick it up. If you see a 368 00:19:43,599 --> 00:19:46,559 cliff edge, don't jump off. If you see a train coming, 369 00:19:46,920 --> 00:19:50,039 don't step in front of it. These perceptions are serious, 370 00:19:50,119 --> 00:19:54,440 they're vivid, and they demand immediate, decisive action, and that 371 00:19:54,480 --> 00:19:57,880 feeling of realness they convey is what makes us react. Right. 372 00:19:58,000 --> 00:20:02,480 Speaker 2: Yes, absolutely take our perceptions seriously. They are vital for 373 00:20:02,519 --> 00:20:05,519 our survival. They compel us to act, and their compelling 374 00:20:05,599 --> 00:20:09,279 nature is precisely what makes them so effective. The perceived 375 00:20:09,359 --> 00:20:12,359 danger of a snake, the perceived vertical drop of a cliff, 376 00:20:12,640 --> 00:20:15,920 the perceived speed and mass of an oncoming train. These 377 00:20:15,920 --> 00:20:19,680 are powerful internal constructions that trigger our fight or flight responses, 378 00:20:19,920 --> 00:20:22,559 hopefully keeping us safe. But and this is the crucial 379 00:20:22,599 --> 00:20:25,240 distinction to carry forward from this whole discussion. While we 380 00:20:25,319 --> 00:20:27,720 must take them seriously, that does not in any way 381 00:20:28,079 --> 00:20:31,119 entitle us to take them literally as an accurate, unmediated 382 00:20:31,119 --> 00:20:32,799 reflection of objective reality. 383 00:20:32,920 --> 00:20:35,079 Speaker 1: Seriously, but not literally exactly. 384 00:20:35,079 --> 00:20:39,319 Speaker 2: Our primal instincts kick in, sometimes overriding rational thought, precisely 385 00:20:39,319 --> 00:20:43,359 because survival is ter amount and often demands immediate, unfiltered action. 386 00:20:44,160 --> 00:20:47,680 I remember once, when I was much younger and far 387 00:20:47,759 --> 00:20:50,680 less careful, I nearly walk directly into a low hanging 388 00:20:50,720 --> 00:20:53,839 branch because I was distracted looking at something else. My 389 00:20:53,960 --> 00:20:57,680 brain's immediate duck response based on a rabbit albeit imprecise 390 00:20:57,880 --> 00:21:00,160 assessment of the incoming object in my peripheral vision and 391 00:21:00,480 --> 00:21:02,559 probably saved me a nasty knock on the head. The 392 00:21:02,599 --> 00:21:05,279 reaction was justified for safety, even if the threat wasn't 393 00:21:05,279 --> 00:21:09,000 fully analyzed consciously. The feeling of realness, the urgency, is 394 00:21:09,039 --> 00:21:12,160 a hardwired mechanism to ensure we act decisively when it counts. 395 00:21:12,359 --> 00:21:15,480 Speaker 1: It's a survival interface, that's the takeaway, not a scientific 396 00:21:15,519 --> 00:21:19,759 instrument designed for objective truth measurement. That makes so much sense, 397 00:21:20,000 --> 00:21:22,599 and it fundamentally changes how I'll think about my own 398 00:21:22,680 --> 00:21:25,240 automatic reactions. And intuitions moving forward. 399 00:21:26,559 --> 00:21:30,359 Speaker 2: Okay, So if our individual perceptions are just one constructed 400 00:21:30,440 --> 00:21:33,680 version of reality, this kind of survival interface, rather than 401 00:21:33,720 --> 00:21:36,559 a literal map, then what does that mean for our 402 00:21:36,559 --> 00:21:42,000 ability to truly understand anything comprehensively? Does it imply there's 403 00:21:42,079 --> 00:21:44,599 no way to ever grasp the full picture of a 404 00:21:44,599 --> 00:21:48,920 complex situation or even a simple object. Are we always limited? 405 00:21:49,200 --> 00:21:51,680 Speaker 1: It leads to the crucial insight that, yes, any single 406 00:21:51,720 --> 00:21:54,359 perspective on a thing, whether it's a physical object, historical event, 407 00:21:54,400 --> 00:21:58,039 a complex social issue, whatever, is inherently a reduction. It's 408 00:21:58,039 --> 00:22:01,519 a simplification of the total information that thing, er situation possesses. 409 00:22:02,039 --> 00:22:04,480 My individual perception, my single point of view, my personal 410 00:22:04,519 --> 00:22:08,000 lived experience, will always offer far less total information than 411 00:22:08,039 --> 00:22:10,799 the actual finger situation contains. It's like looking through a keyhole. 412 00:22:10,960 --> 00:22:13,640 So if I'm looking at something, say a sculpture and 413 00:22:13,680 --> 00:22:16,880 a gallery, I'm only ever getting one small piece of 414 00:22:16,920 --> 00:22:19,559 the puzzle from my viewpoint, and even if I walk 415 00:22:19,599 --> 00:22:22,480 around it, look closer, step back, I'm still just adding 416 00:22:22,480 --> 00:22:25,240 more small pieces, but maybe never getting the whole thing. 417 00:22:25,839 --> 00:22:28,079 Speaker 2: That's quite humbling. Actually, it makes me think about how 418 00:22:28,079 --> 00:22:31,720 often we argue with others completely convinced our single viewpoint 419 00:22:31,799 --> 00:22:32,599 is the entire. 420 00:22:32,440 --> 00:22:35,279 Speaker 1: Truth exactly it should be humbling. Imagine that sculpture. You 421 00:22:35,279 --> 00:22:37,400 can look at it from the east side, capturing the 422 00:22:37,400 --> 00:22:40,480 morning light gleaming off its left flank, or the west side, 423 00:22:40,759 --> 00:22:45,599 seeing the stark evening shadows, defining different shapes. From the top, 424 00:22:45,839 --> 00:22:48,920 maybe looking down from a balcony, you might discern its 425 00:22:48,920 --> 00:22:52,720 overall form, which is completely hidden from ground level. From 426 00:22:52,720 --> 00:22:57,000 the north side, a new, perhaps unexpected angle emerges. You 427 00:22:57,039 --> 00:23:00,559 could look at it microscopically, examining its material compass, the 428 00:23:00,599 --> 00:23:03,359 texture of the bronze, the grain of the wood, or 429 00:23:03,400 --> 00:23:06,880 telescopically if it's part of a larger outdoor installation, seeing 430 00:23:06,880 --> 00:23:09,480 how it relates to the surrounding park or city skyline. 431 00:23:09,559 --> 00:23:12,839 Speaker 2: Right, different scales, different angles. Each of these views will 432 00:23:12,839 --> 00:23:17,119 give you different valid information, and crucially, none of them 433 00:23:17,160 --> 00:23:20,079 individually will provide the entirety of the information about the 434 00:23:20,119 --> 00:23:23,839 sculpture or the situation that's in There is simply no single, 435 00:23:24,039 --> 00:23:28,519 all encompassing perspective that can capture all information about almost 436 00:23:28,559 --> 00:23:32,839 any complex situation. And what's fascinating here is this applies 437 00:23:32,880 --> 00:23:36,200 to abstract concepts and complex problems just as much as 438 00:23:36,200 --> 00:23:38,000 it does to physical objects. 439 00:23:37,799 --> 00:23:40,960 Speaker 1: Like understanding a conflict or a relationship problem. 440 00:23:41,039 --> 00:23:44,960 Speaker 2: Precisely, think about understanding a historical event like a revolution. 441 00:23:45,880 --> 00:23:49,079 You absolutely need to read multiple accounts from different sides, 442 00:23:49,119 --> 00:23:52,599 the victors, the vanquished, the neutral, observers, people from different 443 00:23:52,640 --> 00:23:56,000 social classes, and accounts written at different times with different hindsight. 444 00:23:56,359 --> 00:23:59,000 Each perspective reveals a part of the truth, but never 445 00:23:59,039 --> 00:23:59,759 the whole story. 446 00:24:00,079 --> 00:24:03,559 Speaker 1: So if no single perspective can capture everything, and every 447 00:24:03,599 --> 00:24:07,039 perspective is a partial reduction, what does that imply about 448 00:24:07,079 --> 00:24:09,759 the very nature of reality itself? Is it just this 449 00:24:09,839 --> 00:24:11,200 collection of partial views? 450 00:24:11,319 --> 00:24:14,480 Speaker 2: What this implies, and it's a profound idea, is that 451 00:24:14,559 --> 00:24:17,720 reality itself is trans perspectible. 452 00:24:17,240 --> 00:24:19,599 Speaker 1: Trans perspectivele okay, new word for me. 453 00:24:19,720 --> 00:24:23,000 Speaker 2: Yeah, It just means it transcends or goes beyond any 454 00:24:23,039 --> 00:24:26,720 single perspective. It cannot be fully captured by any one viewpoint. 455 00:24:27,119 --> 00:24:31,240 To truly approach a more complete understanding, multiple perspectives must 456 00:24:31,279 --> 00:24:33,960 be taken, and not just take it passively, but engaged 457 00:24:34,000 --> 00:24:37,480 with thoughtfully. Each perspective, whether it's a visual angle, an 458 00:24:37,519 --> 00:24:42,119 auditory interpretation, an ideological viewpoint, a scientific discipline, or a 459 00:24:42,119 --> 00:24:46,000 personal narrative. Each will offer some part of the reality, 460 00:24:46,119 --> 00:24:50,160 some signal, some genuine insight into the underlying structure of things. 461 00:24:50,480 --> 00:24:53,480 It's like building a complex three D model using scans 462 00:24:53,480 --> 00:24:56,920 from many different angles. Each new scan adds detail and 463 00:24:56,960 --> 00:24:59,960 fidelity to the overall picture, revealing more of the objects 464 00:25:00,079 --> 00:25:00,640 true form. 465 00:25:00,759 --> 00:25:03,039 Speaker 1: And it's not just about getting more pieces of the puzzle. 466 00:25:03,119 --> 00:25:06,200 Some of those pieces might even be well distorted. Is 467 00:25:06,240 --> 00:25:09,000 that fair? Like looking through a funhouse mirror that stretches things, 468 00:25:09,119 --> 00:25:12,400 or maybe a beautifully crafted but still colored stained glass 469 00:25:12,440 --> 00:25:14,680 window that tints everything precisely. 470 00:25:14,920 --> 00:25:17,640 Speaker 2: That's a really important layer. We must acknowledge that these 471 00:25:17,680 --> 00:25:21,079 perspectives can also contain distortion. It's like looking at the 472 00:25:21,079 --> 00:25:23,759 thing through a physical fish eye lens that warps proportions, 473 00:25:24,039 --> 00:25:26,799 or a colored lens that tints everything green. As you said, 474 00:25:27,440 --> 00:25:31,119 but beyond just physical lenses, these distortions are deeply ingrained 475 00:25:31,440 --> 00:25:34,279 and can come from a myriad of sources. Our cultural 476 00:25:34,319 --> 00:25:38,000 biases are huge. The specific historical moment we live in 477 00:25:38,279 --> 00:25:43,039 shapes how we see things, our personal experiences, traumas joys, 478 00:25:43,720 --> 00:25:46,920 the limitations of our language and shaping our thought, or 479 00:25:46,960 --> 00:25:49,359 even the current emotional state where in Fear can make 480 00:25:49,359 --> 00:25:52,359 a shadow appear threatening, joy can make a cloudy day 481 00:25:52,359 --> 00:25:55,960 seem bright. All these factors color and filter what shows 482 00:25:56,039 --> 00:25:58,160 up for us from any given perspective. 483 00:25:57,880 --> 00:25:59,279 Speaker 1: And someone else's filter. 484 00:25:59,079 --> 00:26:02,160 Speaker 2: Might be completely differ completely. And what's even more challenging 485 00:26:02,200 --> 00:26:05,559 sometimes is recognizing that the distortion for one person might 486 00:26:05,599 --> 00:26:08,759 be a fundamental truth for another, given their unique construction 487 00:26:08,799 --> 00:26:11,000 of reality based on their filters and experiences. 488 00:26:11,359 --> 00:26:14,519 Speaker 1: So why does this matter? Why is it so crucial 489 00:26:14,559 --> 00:26:18,480 to understand this trans perspectible nature of reality beyond just 490 00:26:18,559 --> 00:26:21,559 being an interesting academic exercise. How does this apply to 491 00:26:21,599 --> 00:26:23,400 my life? To you the. 492 00:26:23,400 --> 00:26:27,640 Speaker 2: Listener, it matters immensely because the ability to consciously take 493 00:26:27,960 --> 00:26:31,480 multiple perspectives, to see the partial truth and even the 494 00:26:31,519 --> 00:26:34,920 inherent biases or distortions within each, and then to be 495 00:26:34,960 --> 00:26:38,160 able to seem them together into something coherent and actionable 496 00:26:38,680 --> 00:26:42,200 is fundamental to navigating the world effectively. This isn't just 497 00:26:42,240 --> 00:26:45,519 accumulating more viewpoints like stamps in a collection. It's what 498 00:26:45,559 --> 00:26:47,720 we might call a trans perspective capacity. 499 00:26:47,839 --> 00:26:49,000 Speaker 1: Okay, what to that exactly? 500 00:26:49,200 --> 00:26:52,680 Speaker 2: It's the sophisticated ability to hold the relationships between many 501 00:26:52,720 --> 00:26:58,119 diverse perspectives simultaneously to understand how they interrelate contrast, maybe conflict, 502 00:26:58,440 --> 00:27:01,359 and to recognize their individual LIFs, imitations and contributions to 503 00:27:01,400 --> 00:27:06,279 a bigger picture. This capacity is absolutely fundamental to navigating 504 00:27:06,359 --> 00:27:09,079 reality well and to informing our choice making in a 505 00:27:09,079 --> 00:27:13,160 complex world. It's not just abstract. It allows for deeper understanding, 506 00:27:13,440 --> 00:27:17,119 more effective problem solving, and more robust wise decision making. 507 00:27:17,200 --> 00:27:20,119 Can you give an example, sure, think about any major 508 00:27:20,240 --> 00:27:25,279 global challenge like climate change, or geopolitical conflict or economic inequality. 509 00:27:25,920 --> 00:27:31,680 No single perspective, whether it's purely economic, purely scientific, purely political, 510 00:27:31,759 --> 00:27:36,799 purely ethical, purely historical, can fully capture the problem or 511 00:27:36,880 --> 00:27:41,279 generate a complete solution. You need to integrate insights from 512 00:27:41,359 --> 00:27:44,119 all of them, understanding the trade offs, the synergies, the 513 00:27:44,160 --> 00:27:47,920 tensions between those different views. That's transperspective capacity and action. 514 00:27:48,480 --> 00:27:51,920 Speaker 1: That makes incredible sense. So you the listener, what stands 515 00:27:51,920 --> 00:27:53,759 out to you about how this might change the way 516 00:27:53,799 --> 00:27:57,319 you approach disagreements, maybe or even just complex decisions in 517 00:27:57,359 --> 00:27:59,119 your own life. It makes me think about how often 518 00:27:59,160 --> 00:28:02,079 we get stuck in our own single viewpoint, absolutely convinced 519 00:28:02,079 --> 00:28:04,640 it's the only truth, and that leads to stalemates and 520 00:28:04,640 --> 00:28:07,960 discussions with friends, family, colleagues, because we're not even trying 521 00:28:08,000 --> 00:28:08,440 to see it. 522 00:28:08,359 --> 00:28:12,079 Speaker 2: From their angle exactly. And if we connect this to 523 00:28:12,119 --> 00:28:16,000 the bigger picture, this is really about intellectual humility, isn't it, 524 00:28:16,200 --> 00:28:19,960 and a cognitive flexibility adaptability, which are perhaps the most 525 00:28:20,039 --> 00:28:24,279 essential skills in a world drowning in information, undergoing rapid change, 526 00:28:24,400 --> 00:28:29,400 and facing increasingly interconnected complex challenges. My own experience, both 527 00:28:29,440 --> 00:28:32,200 personal and professional, has shown me countless times that a 528 00:28:32,240 --> 00:28:35,839 problem that seems utterly intractable, a puzzle with no apparent 529 00:28:35,880 --> 00:28:39,759 solution from one viewpoint, can suddenly reveal an elegant path 530 00:28:39,839 --> 00:28:43,279 forward when I consciously step back and force myself to 531 00:28:43,279 --> 00:28:46,400 consider it from an entirely different angle, maybe by asking 532 00:28:46,599 --> 00:28:50,119 how would someone with a completely different background, training, political leaning, 533 00:28:50,160 --> 00:28:52,759 or lived experience approach this? What would they see that 534 00:28:52,839 --> 00:28:56,480 I'm missing? Yeah, it's about recognizing that your slice of reality, 535 00:28:56,799 --> 00:28:59,599 while deeply real and profoundly useful for you, is only 536 00:28:59,640 --> 00:29:02,559 one part of the whole, and that true wisdom perhaps 537 00:29:02,559 --> 00:29:05,720 comes from the capacity to synthesize many such parts. It 538 00:29:05,839 --> 00:29:09,319 enables not just understanding, but genuine empathy for why others 539 00:29:09,319 --> 00:29:10,240 see the world differently. 540 00:29:10,359 --> 00:29:12,240 Speaker 1: Okay, this all leads us to an important question that 541 00:29:12,319 --> 00:29:15,880 might seem to contradict everything we've just discussed about constructed realities. 542 00:29:16,440 --> 00:29:21,079 If our individual perceptions are constructed and inherently inaccurate representations 543 00:29:21,079 --> 00:29:24,920 of objective reality, how do we ever make claims of truth? 544 00:29:25,200 --> 00:29:27,920 And how can something like science, which seems to promise 545 00:29:27,960 --> 00:29:32,119 objective answers, actually work with such astonishing success. Is it 546 00:29:32,160 --> 00:29:36,400 all just an elaborate collective hallucination that happens to be useful. 547 00:29:36,640 --> 00:29:38,880 Speaker 2: That's the million dollar question, isn't it? And this is 548 00:29:38,920 --> 00:29:43,000 precisely where the scientific method becomes so incredibly powerful, so unique, 549 00:29:43,079 --> 00:29:48,519 and frankly so successful. It's a systematic, communal self correcting 550 00:29:48,559 --> 00:29:52,240 approach to addressing claims of truth, designed specifically to try 551 00:29:52,240 --> 00:29:57,279 and transcend individual subjective perception. It begins with careful shared observations, 552 00:29:57,400 --> 00:30:01,039 observations that crucially can be replicated by different individuals in 553 00:30:01,079 --> 00:30:05,599 different places. Repeatability is key absolutely, then posing a precise, 554 00:30:05,680 --> 00:30:10,599 testable question about those observations, formulating a testable hypothesis and 555 00:30:10,799 --> 00:30:14,319 educated guests that might answer that question, and then most critically, 556 00:30:14,519 --> 00:30:19,200 systematically designing experiments or observations to test that hypothesis, often 557 00:30:19,240 --> 00:30:23,200 by trying to prove it wrong by attempting falsification. It's 558 00:30:23,240 --> 00:30:27,559 a rigorous communal approach to understanding that moves beyond individual 559 00:30:27,680 --> 00:30:33,160 subjective interpretation by demanding inter subjective agreement, empirical evidence, and 560 00:30:33,240 --> 00:30:35,599 logical consistency and science. 561 00:30:35,759 --> 00:30:38,880 Speaker 1: Despite what we've just discussed about our constructive perceptions, it 562 00:30:38,920 --> 00:30:41,480 really does seem to work in the objective world, doesn't it. 563 00:30:41,480 --> 00:30:45,160 There's a tangible, undeniable reality to its success. It's not 564 00:30:45,319 --> 00:30:48,680 just talk. It's about building things that actually work absolutely. 565 00:30:49,160 --> 00:30:51,160 Speaker 2: You know, there's a kind of whispering campaign out there, 566 00:30:51,200 --> 00:30:55,400 sometimes particularly in certain philosophical or cultural circles, arguing against 567 00:30:55,440 --> 00:30:58,559 the value of objective truth, claiming that it's all subjective, 568 00:30:58,559 --> 00:31:01,480 it's all relative, it's all socially instructed. But science is 569 00:31:01,599 --> 00:31:05,279 belief in and pursuit of objective truth demonstrably works in 570 00:31:05,279 --> 00:31:06,079 the world we inhabit. 571 00:31:06,440 --> 00:31:08,079 Speaker 1: How so, what are the big examples. 572 00:31:08,319 --> 00:31:11,519 Speaker 2: Well, engineering technology built upon the hard won insights of 573 00:31:11,559 --> 00:31:15,559 objective scientific truth, achieves incredible results that impact our daily 574 00:31:15,599 --> 00:31:19,720 lives constantly. It manages to build massive airplanes that consistently 575 00:31:19,720 --> 00:31:23,400 get off the ground and fly safely across continents transporting millions. 576 00:31:23,759 --> 00:31:26,279 That's not subjective. It sends people to the Moon and 577 00:31:26,319 --> 00:31:29,799 brings them back safely. It explores Mars with robotic vehicles 578 00:31:29,839 --> 00:31:33,759 that traverse vast distances and send back data. It investigates 579 00:31:33,799 --> 00:31:36,160 distant commets with mind boggling. 580 00:31:35,680 --> 00:31:37,559 Speaker 1: Precision, and things like GPS. 581 00:31:37,799 --> 00:31:40,240 Speaker 2: Think about the GPS system in your car or phone. 582 00:31:40,599 --> 00:31:44,400 It relies on incredibly precise calculations derived from Einstein's theories 583 00:31:44,440 --> 00:31:47,720 of relativity, which count for things like gravitational time dilation. 584 00:31:48,519 --> 00:31:52,319 Tiny effects, but they matter. Without acknowledging and calculating based 585 00:31:52,359 --> 00:31:55,160 on those objective truths about how space time works near mass, 586 00:31:55,359 --> 00:31:58,000 your GPS simply wouldn't be accurate. It wouldn't work. 587 00:31:58,279 --> 00:32:01,799 Speaker 1: Science builds things that work. It's the ultimate reality check, 588 00:32:01,839 --> 00:32:05,440 isn't it. It produces antibiotics that cure infections that wants 589 00:32:05,480 --> 00:32:09,920 killed millions. It develops vaccines that prevent devastating diseases. It 590 00:32:10,000 --> 00:32:13,599 designs microships that power our entire digital world. You really 591 00:32:13,640 --> 00:32:16,200 can argue with that kind of manifest efficacy. It's not 592 00:32:16,240 --> 00:32:19,759 just a belief system. It's a method that yields demonstrable, 593 00:32:19,920 --> 00:32:21,960 practical results in the shared world. 594 00:32:22,480 --> 00:32:26,200 Speaker 2: Precisely so anybody who chooses to say, oh, there's no 595 00:32:26,279 --> 00:32:28,480 such thing as objective truth. It's all subjective, it's all 596 00:32:28,519 --> 00:32:32,240 socially constructed. Well, tell that to a surgeon performing a 597 00:32:32,279 --> 00:32:37,000 life saving operation based on detailed, objective, anatomical and physiological 598 00:32:37,039 --> 00:32:40,240 truths discovered through science. Or tell that to a space 599 00:32:40,279 --> 00:32:43,200 scientist who just landed a rover on Mars after years 600 00:32:43,200 --> 00:32:48,480 of complex orbital mechanics calculations based on Newton's and Einstein's laws. Manifestly, 601 00:32:48,640 --> 00:32:50,759 science works, and the view that there is no such 602 00:32:50,759 --> 00:32:52,920 thing as objective truth simply doesn't stand up to the 603 00:32:52,920 --> 00:32:55,079 overwhelming empirical evidence of its success. 604 00:32:55,400 --> 00:32:58,720 Speaker 1: But how does it work then, given our flawed individual perceptions? 605 00:32:59,000 --> 00:33:02,119 Speaker 2: That's the key point we touched. Stime science achieves a 606 00:33:02,119 --> 00:33:06,720 form of objective truth despite our individual limitations, how through 607 00:33:06,759 --> 00:33:10,839 its rigorous methods, its emphasis on replication by independent observers, 608 00:33:11,200 --> 00:33:14,319 its structured peer review process. Where others critique the work, 609 00:33:15,000 --> 00:33:18,359 and its relentless pursuit of patterns and principles that hold 610 00:33:18,400 --> 00:33:23,799 true across different observers, contexts, and measurement tools. It seeks consistent, 611 00:33:23,960 --> 00:33:28,160 testable models of the underlying reality that converge across multiple 612 00:33:28,200 --> 00:33:33,680 subjective experiences, effectively filtering out individual perceptual noise to reveal 613 00:33:33,799 --> 00:33:36,640 the objective signal. It's a collective enterprise. 614 00:33:36,880 --> 00:33:40,279 Speaker 1: That distinction is key. Science isn't about one person's perception. 615 00:33:40,680 --> 00:33:43,839 It's about a collective, rigorous method for stripping away the 616 00:33:43,880 --> 00:33:47,000 subjective to get at the reliably objective patterns. And what's 617 00:33:47,039 --> 00:33:49,680 even more fascinating you mentioned earlier, is that sometimes the 618 00:33:49,720 --> 00:33:52,720 pursuit of scientific truth yields insights that surprise even its 619 00:33:52,759 --> 00:33:54,920 own creators, taking on a life of their own. 620 00:33:54,960 --> 00:33:58,599 Speaker 2: Almost Indeed, it's one of the most beautiful and again 621 00:33:58,680 --> 00:34:02,799 humbling aspects of science discovery. When you formalize and write 622 00:34:02,799 --> 00:34:06,200 down a robust theory, particularly one expressed in the precise 623 00:34:06,279 --> 00:34:10,519 language of mathematics, that theory can, in a remarkable way, 624 00:34:10,559 --> 00:34:14,280 become your teacher. It becomes smarter than you are, revealing 625 00:34:14,360 --> 00:34:19,000 consequences or implications that even its brilliant creator didn't initially 626 00:34:19,159 --> 00:34:20,360 know or intend. 627 00:34:20,599 --> 00:34:24,599 Speaker 1: Imagine creating something so profound, so elegant, that it then 628 00:34:24,679 --> 00:34:28,320 teaches you something groundbreaking you never anticipated. That's just wild 629 00:34:29,000 --> 00:34:32,079 A truly humbling experience for a scientist, I'd imagine. 630 00:34:31,679 --> 00:34:34,559 Speaker 2: It truly is, and the most powerful illustration of this 631 00:34:35,000 --> 00:34:37,639 is probably the story of Albert Einstein in General relativity. 632 00:34:38,199 --> 00:34:40,840 When he wrote down the final equations of general relativity, 633 00:34:40,840 --> 00:34:43,320 his groundbreaking theory of gravity, he did not know that 634 00:34:43,360 --> 00:34:45,079 they entailed the existence of black holes. 635 00:34:45,119 --> 00:34:47,400 Speaker 1: He didn't realize his own theory predicted black. 636 00:34:47,199 --> 00:34:50,880 Speaker 2: Holes, not initially. No, in that sense, the equations were 637 00:34:50,880 --> 00:34:54,800 smarter than Einstein himself. He, despite being the architect of 638 00:34:54,800 --> 00:34:59,960 general relativity, actually disbelieved in black holes for decades, thought 639 00:35:00,119 --> 00:35:02,440 they were just a mathematical artifact, a quirk, and a 640 00:35:02,480 --> 00:35:05,519 possibility in the real universe. He even published a paper 641 00:35:05,519 --> 00:35:09,599 in nineteen thirty nine arguing against their physical formation. But 642 00:35:09,679 --> 00:35:12,639 the equations were very clear. They contained solutions found by 643 00:35:12,639 --> 00:35:16,440 others like schwartz Child that describe these incredibly dense, gravitationally 644 00:35:16,440 --> 00:35:20,239 inescapable objects. Ultimately, Einstein was wrong and the. 645 00:35:20,159 --> 00:35:22,239 Speaker 1: Equations were right, and we eventually found. 646 00:35:22,079 --> 00:35:26,079 Speaker 2: Them decades later, with more advanced telescopes and observational techniques, 647 00:35:26,440 --> 00:35:30,119 the existence of black holes was definitively confirmed, just as 648 00:35:30,159 --> 00:35:33,400 his own equations had predicted all along. This highlights the 649 00:35:33,440 --> 00:35:37,760 inherent humility and scientific progress, acknowledging that the natural world 650 00:35:38,000 --> 00:35:41,480 as revealed through our best theories in empirical testing often 651 00:35:41,519 --> 00:35:45,559 holds more wisdom and unexpected phenomena than our current understanding 652 00:35:45,679 --> 00:35:49,639 or intuition. We developed these theories precisely because we can 653 00:35:49,719 --> 00:35:52,840 learn from them, discovering new aspects of reality that were 654 00:35:52,920 --> 00:35:57,280 hidden even to their brilliant originators. Science provides a framework 655 00:35:57,320 --> 00:35:59,639 for reality to speak for itself in a way. 656 00:36:00,000 --> 00:36:02,360 Speaker 1: But then for us to just impose our limited intuition 657 00:36:02,480 --> 00:36:04,760 upon it. Exactly so, it really sounds like we need 658 00:36:04,840 --> 00:36:08,159 different tools or different frameworks, maybe different levels of analysis 659 00:36:08,199 --> 00:36:10,280 to get at different kinds of truth, depending on the 660 00:36:10,320 --> 00:36:13,199 questions we're asking, and sometimes we need a whole variety 661 00:36:13,239 --> 00:36:14,599 of these tools working together. 662 00:36:14,880 --> 00:36:17,440 Speaker 2: It's exactly right. When you try to address the nature 663 00:36:17,480 --> 00:36:20,599 of things, you often find that asking different questions requires 664 00:36:20,960 --> 00:36:26,360 fundamentally different ways of processing the underlying reality, different conceptual toolkits. 665 00:36:26,719 --> 00:36:29,360 For instance, let's think about understanding the human mind again. 666 00:36:29,679 --> 00:36:32,840 If you want to understand it physically, delving into neuroscience, 667 00:36:33,119 --> 00:36:35,920 brain chemistry, the firing of neurons, the structure of neural 668 00:36:35,960 --> 00:36:40,440 networks that requires one kind of processing drawing heavily on 669 00:36:40,559 --> 00:36:45,760 fundamental physical laws chemistry of biology. A reductionist approach, And 670 00:36:45,800 --> 00:36:48,280 there's every reason to think that we already have fundamental 671 00:36:48,320 --> 00:36:51,480 physical laws that are adequate in principle to that kind 672 00:36:51,519 --> 00:36:54,000 of reductionist treatment. You're looking at the mechanics of the machine, 673 00:36:54,039 --> 00:36:54,559 the hardware. 674 00:36:54,760 --> 00:36:57,079 Speaker 1: But the human mind isn't just a collection of neurons 675 00:36:57,079 --> 00:36:59,280 and chemicals firing, is it. It's much more than the 676 00:36:59,280 --> 00:37:04,000 sum of its part its consciousness, emotion, personality, memory, dreams, 677 00:37:05,199 --> 00:37:05,880 the software. 678 00:37:05,920 --> 00:37:09,440 Speaker 2: Maybe it is absolutely and that's where the other lenses 679 00:37:09,440 --> 00:37:13,440 become essential. That's where reductionism might fall short. To understand 680 00:37:13,480 --> 00:37:16,599 how a person works, their thought processes, their moods, their 681 00:37:16,639 --> 00:37:19,760 complex and emotions, their motivations. How these add up to 682 00:37:19,800 --> 00:37:23,800 a unique personality and a complex human actor interacting with 683 00:37:23,840 --> 00:37:27,400 their social and cultural environment That will likely require quite 684 00:37:27,440 --> 00:37:30,639 different ways of understanding and quite different ways of processing 685 00:37:30,639 --> 00:37:34,519 the underlying information structure. This moves beyond pure physics or 686 00:37:34,639 --> 00:37:39,960 chemistry into the realms of psychology, sociology, anthropology, economics, history, 687 00:37:40,159 --> 00:37:41,480 even philosophy in the arts. 688 00:37:41,559 --> 00:37:43,880 Speaker 1: So reducing it all down to physics might miss the 689 00:37:43,920 --> 00:37:45,559 bigger picture of human experience. 690 00:37:45,960 --> 00:37:50,360 Speaker 2: It might miss crucial aspects. Yes, sometimes a reductionist approach 691 00:37:50,519 --> 00:37:54,199 breaking things down to their smallest physical components is simply 692 00:37:54,239 --> 00:37:57,880 insufficient for a full and meaningful understanding of complex phenomena. 693 00:37:58,800 --> 00:38:02,440 This points to the idea of emergent properties, where complex 694 00:38:02,480 --> 00:38:06,320 behaviors or characteristics arise from simpler interactions but cannot be 695 00:38:06,400 --> 00:38:10,199 fully explained or predicted by merely understanding the individual components 696 00:38:10,199 --> 00:38:14,480 in isolation. Think of consciousness itself. It's about needing different 697 00:38:14,559 --> 00:38:18,199 levels of analysis. For complex systems. You need the microview 698 00:38:18,199 --> 00:38:19,079 and the macroview. 699 00:38:19,480 --> 00:38:21,719 Speaker 1: So it's like using different lenses for the same object. 700 00:38:21,719 --> 00:38:23,719 A microscope for looking at the cells that make up 701 00:38:23,719 --> 00:38:26,800 a tree, but a wide angle lens for appreciating the 702 00:38:26,920 --> 00:38:30,920 entire forest, landscape and its ecosystem. Both are true in 703 00:38:30,960 --> 00:38:34,039 their own way. Both offer valid insights, but they answer 704 00:38:34,079 --> 00:38:37,840 completely different questions about the same underlying reality, and you 705 00:38:37,920 --> 00:38:40,519 need both, perhaps to get a truly comprehensive picture. 706 00:38:40,760 --> 00:38:44,079 Speaker 2: Precisely, that's a wonderful way to put it. Each lens 707 00:38:44,199 --> 00:38:48,199 reveals a different valid aspect, and it's often the integration 708 00:38:48,320 --> 00:38:51,599 of these multiple perspectives, these different levels of analysis, that 709 00:38:51,719 --> 00:38:57,039 moves us closer to a fuller, richer understanding of complex realities, 710 00:38:57,079 --> 00:38:59,519 whether it's a forest or a human being. 711 00:39:00,119 --> 00:39:03,320 Speaker 1: Incredible journey we've taken in this deep dive. We started 712 00:39:03,360 --> 00:39:06,800 with that captivating thought that our perceived world isn't quite 713 00:39:06,800 --> 00:39:09,679 what it seems, and we've come full circle armed with 714 00:39:09,960 --> 00:39:13,760 well some pretty profound new insights. I think we've explored 715 00:39:13,800 --> 00:39:18,320 how our senses are not passive receivers, but beautiful, incredibly 716 00:39:18,440 --> 00:39:22,400 useful constructions, generating a reality that is our personal interface 717 00:39:22,559 --> 00:39:25,679 rather than a literal, objective mirror of the external world. 718 00:39:25,760 --> 00:39:28,840 Speaker 2: Yeah, the interface idea is key, useful, but not literal. 719 00:39:29,079 --> 00:39:31,840 Speaker 1: We've seen that reality itself is likely far too vast 720 00:39:31,840 --> 00:39:35,280 and complex to be captured by any single viewpoint, highlighting 721 00:39:35,280 --> 00:39:38,000 the need for intellectual humility and the active embrace of 722 00:39:38,079 --> 00:39:39,119 multiple perspectives. 723 00:39:39,320 --> 00:39:41,599 Speaker 2: That transperspectible nature is so important. 724 00:39:41,679 --> 00:39:44,760 Speaker 1: And yet despite our subjective perceptions, we saw how science 725 00:39:44,800 --> 00:39:49,760 provides this powerful, rigorous path towards objective truths that demonstrably 726 00:39:49,760 --> 00:39:53,360 work in the world, yielding incredible technologies and an ever 727 00:39:53,400 --> 00:39:56,239 deepening understanding of the cosmos and ourselves. 728 00:39:56,679 --> 00:39:58,440 Speaker 2: It's quite a picture when you put it all together, 729 00:39:58,480 --> 00:40:01,599 isn't it. This understanding It really changes everything once you 730 00:40:01,679 --> 00:40:05,679 truly start to internalize it. If our individual realities are 731 00:40:05,760 --> 00:40:11,039 so profoundly personal, so constructed for our survival and utility. 732 00:40:11,199 --> 00:40:15,119 How does this transform our approach to empathy, to conflict resolution, 733 00:40:15,400 --> 00:40:17,960 or even to the simple daily act of listening deeply 734 00:40:18,000 --> 00:40:21,639 to another person's perspective, trying to understand their constructed reality. 735 00:40:21,719 --> 00:40:23,239 Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a powerful thought to end on. 736 00:40:23,519 --> 00:40:26,719 Speaker 2: It suggests that true understanding isn't necessarily about one person's 737 00:40:26,760 --> 00:40:30,679 reality triumphing over another's, or about finding the single right 738 00:40:30,719 --> 00:40:34,119 answer that fits everyone. But maybe it's more about building 739 00:40:34,159 --> 00:40:38,480 bridges between those distinct, complex and yet equally valid internal worlds. 740 00:40:38,920 --> 00:40:43,039 It's about recognizing that what seems undeniably real and true 741 00:40:43,039 --> 00:40:46,159 and obvious to you might be experienced completely differently by 742 00:40:46,159 --> 00:40:49,599 someone else, based on their biology, their history, their context, 743 00:40:49,840 --> 00:40:52,119 and that their experience is just as valid for them 744 00:40:52,159 --> 00:40:53,079 as yours is for you. 745 00:40:53,519 --> 00:40:55,920 Speaker 1: So what does this all mean for you, the listener, 746 00:40:56,000 --> 00:40:58,159 and how you choose to engage with the world. Knowing 747 00:40:58,159 --> 00:41:00,280 that your reality is both utterly real to you and 748 00:41:00,280 --> 00:41:04,840 beautifully fabricated by you. It invites a lifelong curiosity, doesn't it, 749 00:41:04,880 --> 00:41:08,199 to constantly question your assumptions, maybe with a bit more humility, 750 00:41:08,679 --> 00:41:12,519 to actively seek out new perspectives, even uncomfortable ones, and 751 00:41:12,599 --> 00:41:16,000 perhaps to revel in the magnificent, evolving construction that is 752 00:41:16,039 --> 00:41:19,519 your reality, and indeed the collective reality we all strive, 753 00:41:19,639 --> 00:41:22,039 however imperfectly, to understand together