Evolutionary Psychology & Pronatalism with Dr. Geoffrey Miller

In this thought-provoking episode, Malcolm and Simone sit down with Geoffrey Miller, an evolutionary psychologist and author, to discuss the complex interplay between evolutionary instincts, modern technology, and pronatalism. Geoffrey shares insights on how evolved drives for social status and relationships can be short-circuited by digital distractions, leading to reduced fertility. The conversation delves into the potential paths forward for humanity, including traditionalist and cognitive strategies, the role of moral disgust in shaping technophobic conservatism, and the challenges of raising children in a rapidly changing world. They also explore the pronatalist potential of polyamory, the risks and benefits of genetic engineering, and the ethical considerations surrounding AI development and human enhancement.

Timestamps:
00:00 Introduction and welcome to Geoffrey Miller
01:52 How evolutionary psychology explains the mismatch between ancestral drives and modern behavior
05:32 The addictive nature of social media and its impact on real-life relationships
08:15 Two paths forward: pronatalist traditionalism and cognitive strategies
11:28 The role of moral disgust and techno-skepticism in shaping conservative worldviews
14:11 Strategies for raising children with pronatalist values in a rapidly changing world
17:35 The pronatalist potential and challenges of polyamory
21:45 The tension between rapid technological progress and the appeal of traditionalist lifestyles
24:09 The case for a temporary pause in AI development to encourage pronatalism
27:11 Debating the risks and benefits of preemptive bans on AI and human enhancement technologies
31:16 The feasibility and ethical considerations of genetic interventions in adult humans
34:21 Conclusion and where to find more of Geoffrey Miller's work

[stephencooper]

Polyamory is wrong! It should be “multiamory” or “polyphilia” and EVERYONE needs to stop mixing Greek and Latin roots….

[PanopticonMind]

Polycules overwhelmingly fail because of our modern landscape. They only worked historically when other mate choice was low, and communitarian efforts were greatly rewarded just to survive. Plus Geoffrey Miller's points. Basically, there are too few incentives and faaaar too many disincentives to stick around in a polycule, especially in the first world.

[StephenDeagle]

Anyone tricking themselves into thinking polyamory can be pronatalist needs to recognize that all the studies looking into it have found the children of such "families" at massive disadvantage compared to their monogamous peers.

[Ven-zgfj]

@12:00 im currently working a keyboard-desk job with restrictive clothing and no access to natural light. My disgust reaction is off the charts all the time. I gotta do something else.

[wyatt]

20:00 what do you think about the possibility of two stable groups forming: an Amish like group that suffers from some attrition and a vampiric secular group that grows from recruitment?

Right now it seems the Vampiric element you call the supervirus is too strong and causing an imbalance in population, whereas in 1960, you could say the conservative element was too strong.

Is it possible we will always have some of both?

[blindtrace]

Great, Malcolm is going to make an army of super-intelligent ex-cons. What could possibly go wrong.

[malhenning]

i read an appropriate rule set up (in a syfy novel) for robots

"it is illegal to create a robot and you will be prosecuted for doing so. In the event of a robot coming into existence it is not to be enslaved and if it has the intellectual capacity it has full citizenship rights."

[skylinefever]

I love the second strategy proposed. I have discussed it for a while. I called it reverse engineering the desire to make and raise kids.

I often joke that there will be two things selected for. Actual desire to have kids, and people too stupid to remember a condom. Brawndo's got electrolytes!

[buglepong]

just have babbies bro it cant be that hard amirite

[bwhit]

Do you have any technical thoughts on AI? Like do you agree with the scaling laws? Are small language models the future? Is OpenAI going to be a trillion dollar corporation some day?

[Jules-Is-a-Guy]

Fleischman & Miller are awesome, and not just because their vanity plate is DTF4LIFE.

[AbsurdBear]

Today's episode is brought to you by Zenni Optical. Zenni: "If you're not wearing our glasses, don't even talk to us."

[mememan]

Tatiana she could be useful for any tenant fat. I imagine most gay people would not assist because of this Hagi not only that, but even our gender base people will not assist to. Surprisingly, that is the most interesting thing I ever think about it’s time to say I kinda dark inside how I think of that way too. 34:36

[HoradrimBR]

The patriarchs of the Old lived that way, but under less liberal/igualitarian terms.

[erikesswein]

>old man with broccoli haircut

Opinion disregarded

[moriden]

The obvious editing makes the channel seems like there trying to hide something. shame as they come across less insane then usual in this one.

[keylanoslokj]

Bro still tries to become nerd version Charles Manson

[Jules-Is-a-Guy]

Malcolm tryna experiment on prisoners alla lab rats, mainly for the lol's *twirls mustache*

[mattsmith]

People are trying to play creator.... what could go wrong? Lol

[Teawisher]

I feel like superhuman smart AI could be incredibly useful for helping us to figure out how to have more kids. It can help us plan a life where the cost of having kids is smaller so more people want them because their pros/cons -calculations are pushed away from the negative. A lot of people would be more open to kids if their resource and attention cost was smaller and we had artificial wombs so women don't have to suffer pregnancy if they don't want to deal with that.

AI seems really useful for making all of those obstacles easier to surpass.

Ofc it could also lure people into hedonism chambers and so on but the increased mastery over physical world is so tempting. If we manage for example to halve the workweek a lot of people would want to add meaningful stuff to their lives and kids is one big thing. I feel like awareness of the feeling of meaning being important is a rapidly growing cultural trend and we might have more potential parents who kinda want kids but it's hard to step over the line of such a huge commitment that completely upheaves your life.

AI could help with a softer landing to parenting for people who are technophilic and "want to have a life" in addition to being parents. To me technology allows people to have better compromises that approach "have your cake and eat it too" and AI is kind of just technology in steroids with all the good and bad.