Origins of the Mind - Antonio Damasio, MD, PhD | The FitMind Podcast

[@aadvijverberg7342]

This interview really gives a broad perspective on Damasio's thinking about the how and why of the neurosystem and brain and the importance of feelings as a starting point.

[@User-jr7vf]

as a native portuguese speaker I prefer to listen to him speaking in portuguese

[@JavierBonillaC]

I read Descartes error a long time ago and the quality of the content of that book is truly admirable. You won’t feel you’ve read an uninteresting page in the who.e book. This man is not only very very wise, but he is also great at explaining things.

[@adventmunga1871]

Hh

[@DMK195601]

One of the best interviews I've seen with this great man. Thank you.

[@LewisMarkMonticello]

41:18 Fabulous insight.

[@ocorvobranco]

Thank you

[@roginebacani8669]

Help sir... 🙏🇵🇭🇯🇵🇪🇹🇱🇷🥺

[@alfredorezende-po8pg]

Feeling is a manifestation to external world to what cause a move in ones internal psicological struture.

[@alfredorezende-po8pg]

Mesmo organismos mais elementares possuem "alma","mente" a partir do momento em que percebem que o "outro" lhe é externo.

[@alfredorezende-po8pg]

Antonio spells out cleary. Good

[@roginebacani8669]

Help sir... 🙏🇵🇭🇯🇵🇪🇹🇱🇷🥺

[@Elizabeth-mp6tr]

Why did man "evolve" into a complex "organism" when others have not? What is special about man and not other organisms if we have evolved to these "complex of structures which is our nervous system?" Dr. Damasio is just explaining the reactions of other organisms and making the conclusion that this is how we evolved. I wish Dr. Damasio were not so limited to evolutionary thoughts. Why then did we develop morality -- through evolution? This has not explained, in my mind, any reasoning different from simple organisms. And if evolution is the answer, then why are we now destroying our world in such a short evolutionary time frame? Wouldnt evolution be specific to the survival of the species? If we are so "intelligent" why are we destroying our world? I find this discussion limited in an evolutionary reasoning.

[@MaheeSharma-u5l]

We didn't develop the basic emotions (anget, enjoyment,fear) was there ,and in teh process whatever we face our ancestors used emotion and reasoning to form rules or moral codes which become their habit and that habit energy transmitted from generation to generation and lives inside you that's why we are still having that habitual emotion even env Today now pretty face

[@AnalyticalSentient]

Accurate axiology is rooted in valence. Historically we've been ignorant and biased towards self-preservation, and preservation patterns that probabilistically aligned with survival of species. Our pro-social, emotive mammalian or 'ape brain' capacities consists of much of our organic moral sense that allowed for our being more than totally selfish organisms. Though psychological egoism is inescapable and a self-interested lens is inevitable regardless of how constructive or destructive we function as in relation to others Anyhow, somehow we still haven't intellectually advanced enough to overcome such old biases to any nearly complete level yet, still mired in nepotism and other arbitrary tribalisms. Nepotism, sexism, racism, classicism, nationalism and speciesm are all equally irrational in a strictly logical sense. The only intrinsically urgent object of logical import is valence (though we can only directly detect our own, thus the wide spectrum of assholes can continue to exist). I'm no better fundamentally; I'm an asshole also, though much less so in following this understanding and path of effort to become better than my base biological animal nature.

[@Elizabeth-mp6tr]

@@AnalyticalSentient Abiogenesis explains everything and nothing. We still don't know who "Our Creator" is, with science and evolution. There is a very limited viewpoint to life without the belief in God as an Intelligent Designer! Our bodies are a miracle that are to be discovered and maybe, never will we find the final answer, in our limited minds, until we believe in God.

[@AnalyticalSentient]

@@Elizabeth-mp6tr Way to not address a single piece of my actual comment.

[@AnthonyLeaman]

He is 99.999 per cent to infinity correct, sadly he only reaches the same conclusion as every other great thinker, confusing consciousness with neural activity. That is are just conduction of messages from the knower to areas of the body that require action to be taken not consciousness itself or the knower.