Why are you social? - Big Picture Science

Crowded subway driving you crazy? Sick of the marathon-length grocery store line? Wish you had a hovercraft to float over traffic? If you are itching to hightail it to an isolated cabin in the woods, remember, we evolved to be together. Humans are not only social, we’re driven to care for one another, even those outside our immediate family.

We look at some of the reasons why this is so – from the increase in valuable communication within social groups to the power of the hormone oxytocin. Plus, how our willingness to tolerate anonymity, a condition which allows societies to grow, has a parallel in ant supercolonies.

Guests:

Adam Rutherford – Geneticist and author of “Humanimal: How Homo sapiens Became Nature’s Most Paradoxical Creature – a New Evolutionary History”

Patricia Churchland – Neurophilosopher, professor of philosophy emerita at the University of California San Diego, and author most recently of “Conscience: The Origins of Moral Intuition”

Mark Moffett – Tropical biologist, Smithsonian Institution researcher, and author of “The Human Swarm: How Our Societies Arise, Thrive and Fall”

[zapfanzapfan]

I'm not social, I stay indoors and listen to Big Picture Science :-)

[PaddysPubPatron]

Lovin this SETI activity on YouTube lately! Will definitely check out the podcast.

[WaltRBuck]

I avoid other humans like the plague (because they're not too far from it).. but I talk to my cat all day so I guess I am social.

[JaSuRi_AiLa]

SETI would not recognize extraterrestrials if they came to Earth with a fleet of spaceships and made contact with SETI.

[galaxia]

Please come back with the talks on here. And why don't you upload the podcast here as well, instead of this other guy with some name that has nothing to do with SETI.

[tonysilva]

Okay the mother Bond and the nurturing that comes with it can explain part of it but the exclusion the importance of the father's role completely contaminates this Theory and makes it rather unscientific, and potentially very dangerous thinking, and conveying this idea that the nurturer from the mother is a soul factor in preventing people from using outright unjustifiable violence doesn't reflect the reality of the statistics today as it relates to children raised in single-mother households. Father's role in a child's psychosocial development is extremely imperative but it has been omitted for some reason oh, it is evident today that we are seeing this enormous agenda against the men for simply being men, classifying Mendes having toxic masculinity when we understand that masculinity is an important component of survival Even in our modern times. Despite the fact that they're trying to push this narrative that women should not seek and do not seek masculine men is completely unfounded completely false misleading and has an element of evil especially when it goes against all the sound scientific facts. Women seek out a mate they do look for masculine qualities 100% oh, but of course they want to push this narrative that women are looking for a beta male which suggests that males off to play a subservient role to the woman oh, and this can only lead to extremely poor psychosocial development in females, more specifically it will promote narcissism. And that is not good LOL we're also beginning to find out. The transgender Community is at high risk of suicide and not from bullying as a mainstream is trying to push but rather because they realized over time that they made a dreadful mistake in removing there genitals. So ultimately without a father figure and a mother figure child cannot develop a complete and whole sound psychosocial frame of reference.