Why hasn't human civilization destroyed itself yet? | Richard Wrangham and Lex Fridman

Lex Fridman Podcast full episode: • Richard Wrangham: Viol...
Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors:
- ROKA: roka.com/ and use code LEX to get 20% off your first order
- Theragun: therabody.com/lex to get 30 day trial
- ExpressVPN: expressvpn.com/lexpod and use code LexPod to get 3 months free
- NI: www.ni.com/perspectives
- Grammarly: grammarly.com/lex to get 20% off premium
GUEST BIO:
Richard Wrangham is a biological anthropologist at Harvard, specializing in the study of primates and the evolution of violence, sex, cooking, culture, and other aspects of ape and human behavior.
PODCAST INFO:
Podcast website: lexfridman.com/podcast
Apple Podcasts: apple.co/2lwqZIr
Spotify: spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
RSS: lexfridman.com/feed/podcast/
Full episodes playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast
Clips playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast Clips
SOCIAL:
- Twitter: / lexfridman
- LinkedIn: / lexfridman
- Facebook: / lexfridman
- Instagram: / lexfridman
- Medium: / lexfridman
- Reddit: / lexfridman
- Support on Patreon: / lexfridman

[@tripledoubletroubful]

I'm not a scientist, in fact I'm an idiot, but I've worked a few jobs where I've been the only man there and I could not be more certain this guy is wrong.

[@eldel5806]

LOL! Yes agreed. I think he's missing a few data points.

[@Weed-sq3rt]

Yeah, this guy is completely wrong about women. Def drinking the “modern” cool aid way too much. My wife hates guys like this because they’re completely clueless

[@GG-hu9dn]

These are the kind of people that are relied upon for "expert-opinions"??

[@austin47122]

Anecdotal evidence based on feelings. You’re not a scientist indeed.

[@skyyoung592]

@@austin47122 and this guy isn't a scientist on human behavior

[@eddy87su]

This conversation escalated from interesting discussion about human nature, geopolitics and nuclear weaponry to batshit crazy very quickly.

[@mustang607]

I noticed that the guest was originally talking about these utopian ideas, put into practice by the "wrong people", which led to genocide, and now he's talking about how we can eliminate men to make a gentler society. These two are related.

[@brianwade8649]

Well said. F'd up.

[@loucard4856]

Lex goes of on a tangent at times! Got weird.

[@st3ppenwolf]

That was a good thought experiment, wtf

[@hypersonicvipclub]

Human nature

[@alvarosalgado377]

Never forget the resentment that a male library rat can hold against less risk-averse male peers.

[@Dedicated_.1]

Proof that a PhD doesn’t always predicate a good argument.

[@martinzarathustra8604]

Naw, it just proves that you don't understand the argument.

[@Vinicius.Passos.]

@@martinzarathustra8604 Dude, you're unsufferable.

[@martinzarathustra8604]

@@Vinicius.Passos. Good one. Man did you put me in my place. Lol

[@redmonkeyass26]

@@martinzarathustra8604 ok, Martina

[@st3ppenwolf]

I thought it was a good thought experiment.

[@TheKafkianProcess]

To get rid of so-called “male violence” and then get to keep genius, creativity and adventurous spirit in humans? Nope, you definitely can't have it both ways.

[@wokestermcgloke2082]

Women have a propensity for power the same as men and to think there wouldn’t be the same atrocity’s and power struggles with women is naive

[@josiahz21]

Hell hath no fury like Elizabeth bathory.

[@elkarion]

Sometimes in a more sinister way.

[@dalegrant9282]

@@DensityMatrix1 Women - more emotional, less rational - don't see it ending well.

[@rebornsmith7542]

A world with all women... we all know how well all women get along. Meow.

[@charliekowalski7163]

I am a recovering heroin addict and in the town I live in there is 8 mens halfway houses ( houses in which people stay sober to live there) and there is 2 women houses. It’s not because there are less women addicts but it’s because they can’t get along and too much drama. I’m close with the owners of 5 male houses and 1 female house. For some reason women cannot live amongst each other successfully. Not sure if it’s cause pms week they fly off the handle or just the way men deal with conflict aka talk or fight. Women I feel like are way more passive aggressive and catty. Men either beat each other up or use diplomacy to fix a problem. Women gossip and backstab. To anyone that thinks I’m just pulling this out of my ass, I’ve experienced all of this for the last two years and have spoken to women in the houses and the owners.

[@meownover1973]

Nah men are more dramatic. Women don't cause wide scale violence due to interpersonal drama. We also tend to keep communities together. So it's all good.

[@itsnotatoober]

@@meownover1973 The famous passive aggressive diplomacy you are famous for on full display. Thank you for the demonstration.

[@ChristopherRyans]

🤼‍♀️

[@yuk4z3]

@@meownover1973 keep communities together 🤣🤣 i’d say you guys are the opposite

[@tylersquibb1727]

The moment you realize he’s not joking🥲

[@PhilosoFeed]

Lmao there are PhDs who fantasize about removing all men from humanity. This is insane. Those schools owe those kids their money back.

[@martinzarathustra8604]

The argument is actually sound. You just don't like it.

[@PhilosoFeed]

@@martinzarathustra8604 it's not an argument, it's a fantasy - his words, not mine. You just think it's a sound argument because you share in the fantasy.

[@martinzarathustra8604]

@@PhilosoFeed Not really. It's a thought experiment. You know like we do in philosophy all the time? His point is clear: in mammals like humans, males are responsible for almost all of the violent conflict. This is just empericaly true. He is not making a moral claim, just a pragmatic one to Lex's question. If you wanted to eliminate war and violence getting rid of the source of it is a valid argument. You are reacting emotionally because you are trained like Pavlov's dogs to make everything political.

[@PhilosoFeed]

@@martinzarathustra8604 yes, it's like the classic idea that AI will complete the task of removing all human suffering simply by eliminating all human beings. Except as Lex pointed out, and as many others have here, this idea has its flaws in the notion that women would never engage in violent conflict. I don't know much about this guest, but his idea is pretty embarrassingly shallow. It's like he genuinely has no conception of zero sum competition for resources, and no knowledge of history outside the sheltered Western view (which still contains several cultures with female warriors, such as the Norse and their ancestors stretching back to the Scythians). If you're going to do radical philosophy out loud in front of a camera, you should probably think it through a bit first.

[@ccshredder9506]

@@martinzarathustra8604 you dont think that women would just fill in the role if there were no more males?

[@bcrnl9603]

He should go first. Lead the way, my man.

[@dopet4h2c0]

FACTS this dude is a lunatic

[@richyepo]

See above comments

[@what-a-life8097]

😭

[@what-a-life8097]

#FollowTheYellowBrickRoad 🤣

[@BBshark000]

You completely missed the point. Proof that not everyone watching Lex podcasts are as intellectual as they like to think themselves to be.

[@pseudoname9229]

Interesting thought experiment. One thing I perceive men of being better at, which would be invaluable in a sustainable society, is the acceptance of duty and responsibility. I agree that women are a little bit less aggressive, and that may lead to less conflict, but I’m often disappointed in how they sometimes disregard responsibility and/or justify their actions through emotion and not reason. I think the dichotomy of men and women is what makes a cohesive society. War, based on what I know historically, seems just as probable under female rule, and possibly even more likely. For instance, the Iroquois female tribe elders were the ones who called for war, and they did so more prevalently than their male counterparts of that era. Lex is right. The future is empathy, not gender rule

[@katie3055]

I wonder the reasons for those choices, both men and woman, why they choose it.

[@HankBukowski]

@@katie3055 Why do you think?

[@martinzarathustra8604]

@@katie3055 Choice is an illusion.

[@jonathanwoodvincent]

@@martinzarathustra8604 yup, yet this is something most can't choose to admit

[@ccshredder9506]

@@katie3055 we are influenced by what prevails, regardless of how right or wrong it is...

[@TopeA8]

It is also possible that it won't even reduce conflict in the long arc of history anyway. Let me begin with the patriarchy. The patriarchy is not a male conspiracy to subjugate women. Men did not occupy more powerful positions than women because we hate women. We occupied more powerful positions because WE COULD. The two fundamental qualities that gave us that 'advantage' are our strength and aggression. If women were stronger and more aggressive, we would certainly be theorizing about a matriarchy. Men are not fundamentally evil in any way. It is simply natural selection at play. Of course, given our gradual development of ethics, we begin the discussion about how best to accommodate others and resist our base instincts. This makes sense. Which leads me to my actual point. The natural selection process that leads to dominance and hierarchies is not unique to men. If men were eliminated, yes due to the simple facts of lower testosterone levels and traits related to dominance, women would indeed be relatively more peaceful. However, over time it is also likely that the more aggressive women would dominate. Granted it would take a considerably period of time, given that modern advances have rendered aggression and physicality relatively less important over time.

[@Vinicius.Passos.]

Great comment!

[@markcounseling]

You hint at an interesting possibility. The logical/rational faculties that men are sometimes criticized for, in comparison to the warmer, empathetic, feeling/emotional faculties that we tend to associate more with women, may in fact have been an adaptation to deal with their own and others' aggression. If Males are gone and this faculty is less present in the population, we might see greater conflict, actually.

[@johnbrown4568]

Listening to Wrangham brings to mind a quote from Thomas Sowell ----> “The power of the intelligentsia is demonstrated not only by their ability to create a general climate of opinion that strikes fear into those who oppose their agenda but also by their ability to create a climate of opinion which richly rewards those political leaders whose decisions are consonant with the vision of the intelligentsia.” ― Thomas Sowell, Intellectuals and Society

[@VisionaryVet]

China is demonstrating their ability to create a climate of opinion now . They are now preparing their citizens for war by pushing propaganda notifications to every citizens phone for several months now . Be ready .

[@Disaletteritis]

Never heard about this bloke...Sowell yes. We need more Sowell's.

[@dirty69impala]

@@Disaletteritis Sowell is an idiot. The ability to string words together that appear to make sense is not a very difficult thing to do. If you examine the quote critically, you’ll find that he asks you to make an assumption on what you consider “Intelligentsia”. He also asks you to make an assumption on your very own ability to think critically. The quote actually assumes the vast majority of people are completely unable to make decisions not based on an emotional response. It also totally discounts the motivations involved in politics and those who are involved on both sides of the discussion. This is the type of quote that forms the basis of the pathology for regimes to murder those they consider “intelligentsia”. Also, quite saliently, He AKS YOU TO ASSUME HE IS NOT ONE WHO FOLKS WOULD CONSIDER PART OF THE INTELLIGENTSIA !! Irony, where is thy sting?! Here’s a man who makes a living simply by making academic observations. Never, ever quote Sowell to anyone ever again.

[@mixtapeweezy6871]

Which part struck fear into your heart? Lol

[@condor-yz6bo]

All of this guys years of study and the best he can come up with is to get rid of males since they fight too much. Get him out of here

[@BT-yo3eq]

It’s unfortunate because his insights are very intriguing. But his conclusion is absolutely absurd. Who even wants to live in a world with zero conflict? Conflict exists for a reason.

[@ccshredder9506]

@@BT-yo3eq exactly. His intention is nice... his conclusion is questionable

[@courtneytwait3351]

Awww did he hurt your feelings, boys?

[@condor-yz6bo]

@@courtneytwait3351 no it's just typically when someone's solution is to eliminate a group of people for the benefit of others that tends to make them evil.

[@richyepo]

He’s not very bright

[@SpringyPhoenix]

Lex, excellent job providing counter narrative. I appreciate that you don’t just grift to the interviewee’s perspective. If anyone was to humanize ai systems, thank goodness it’s you!

[@deerlow1851]

One of the most absurd propositions I have ever heard hahhha

[@melange78]

Insanely naive to think that women would not self destruct, he can't have watched more than two minutes of TikTok videos to make that assessment.

[@alexanderward3989]

When Lex talks about how beauty and war go hand in hand it reminds me of the movie Equilibrium where this exact thing happens, they remove the want for beauty and thus the need for war.

[@Keithwilliams-ql3xn]

Oooooh I remember Dat movie

[@bowmanencore]

That's the theory of the antagonist, right. It doesn't quite play out as intended though.

[@d.h.1999]

"You can't just teach empathy, you have to beat it into the children." Now my question. Does this proposal mean he was beaten to much or to little?

[@dms5341]

Reminiscing on the good times before this video when I still had brain cells

[@hypnocilicdreams]

hahaha. thanks for the laugh :)

[@truthseeker2222]

100 percent lol

[@larrybailey517]

In a historically based analysis it should be considered that women have not had the same opportunity to negatively affect humanity. What if women had been given the same power to commit human atrocities?

[@tankerd1847]

Exactly. I don't think we've ever seen a female absolute monarch or a dictator during a time period where they could cause extreme damage. I'm talking power like Louis XIV or Hitler. Imagine if Queen Victoria had completely unrestricted personal power in the 19th century.

[@navyblue76]

5:30 This "educated" PhD guy actually said, "you really need to get rid of males." I'm sure that would instantly fix everything wrong with the world.

[@Truth_Hurts528]

Clearly this man has never heard of Hilary Clinton. I wonder what he thinks of Margret Thatcher and the Falklands war.....

[@casanovafrankenstein5228]

That’s two women you’ve named .

[@surfingtothestars]

when you take your "intellect" and philosophy too far and you become tyrannical lol

[@maheraljubari7558]

Richard is a pure genius. And anyone who disagrees doesn’t get it.

[@d.h.1999]

That's not how it works though. I can get it AND disagree with it. Really.

[@Fallen_Ninja]

A lot of people in here are not grasping the fact that this is a though experiment and are being offended by the interviewees comments. I could be wrong though.

[@ItsSVO]

You’re 100% correct

[@philking3892]

Reduction of conflict will only come with a reduction of people wanting more wealth and power.

[@philking3892]

@S Gary The gaining of wealth as a means to hold power over others for the purposes of control and manipulation can be experienced at different levels in society. There are sociopaths and psychopaths everywhere for instance. At the moment it seems to be a big problem with the controlling establishments of many countries around the world.

[@philking3892]

@S Gary Agreed 100%. The problem is that they control the information by controlling the mainstream media where many people still get their information from and therefore have their opinions manipulated. We're still very far from being able to 'stop the rot' because too many people are so easily manipulated.

[@crouchingwombathiddenquoll5641]

Lex, you need one of those ejector seat's for your guests. And a big red button on the table next to your coffee cup.

[@gordonberridge9183]

Hmm. I am struggling to find Richard's idea of an all female planet a good one. What gives life awe and wonderment is its variety, its unknowing, its unpredictability. Without males, females wouldn't have anyone to moan about, anyone to blame for the marks on the toilet, or, on a more serious note, to test the boundaries of human/AI-human possibilities.

[@brianwade8649]

So I wish this entire conversation had been a deeper dive into the last two sentences. Widespread teaching/learning/practicing empathy IS the future.

[@imbritish]

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[@2894031]

Lex‘s guests aren’t all particularly clever 💁🏿‍♀️

[@danielloughney9199]

I thought it was an interesting conversation

[@emilioalvarez8010]

Why because what he says goes against your precious narrative? I'm sure you have the truth

[@casanovafrankenstein5228]

Yeah right and you are clever Mr Bot .

[@redmonkeyass26]

@@emilioalvarez8010 So claiming that eliminating Males is stupid is a precious narrative according to you ? Ok, Emilia.

[@emilioalvarez8010]

Aww look someone thinks he made a clever insult and thinks hes manly. The point I'm making is this new reactionary idea that women are just as bad is stupid. Idc how toxic and stupid feminists are at the end of the day it's obvious that the main problems throughout history and currently come from powerhungry violent men. I think prisons are proof of that.

[@stuartmccleary]

Basically this dude brought up a theory that “triggered” Lex and very professionally politely and charismatically proposed his counter repeatedly enough that the gentleman started to consider how insane what he was tryna bring up was without the consideration of so many aspects of humanity while saying it. We are in a dark world where there are men excitedly saying, “what if we got rid of all of us? Don’t you think the world would be great” to another man 😂

[@mixtapeweezy6871]

That's not what he said though. Lmao. He said very specifically that he didn't think that getting rid of males would result in an utopia.

[@fox-body]

Didn’t some one in history think the world would be better of with out a certain type of people? This thinking is dangerous.

[@jostencline6443]

This guy could not be wrong about males. we are not apes, much of our competition goes into creative endeavors, like say... going to the moon. Male aggression and competitiveness is a HUGE part of what has driven society forward. ape culture hasn't changed in tens of thousands of years. This guy misses a very critical point.

[@rosefang45]

That thought experiment of Robert Wrangham is the craziest thing I’ve ever heard on KZbin…

[@yanoushky2565]

We mostly build everything and repair everything... Mâles are indispensable!

[@markwhite2207]

Exactly!...and who's gonna put the bins out?

[@AlexHernandez-gn6rd]

Gender should be a non issue as ppl say. But when your running a warehouse and need to do heavy lifting gender will play a major role

[@AlexHernandez-gn6rd]

@@markwhite2207 have you heard the epic joke on JRE. About a guy working out. Stating to pump himself up. “Who’s gonna move the boats” lol. I thought thats wear you where going

[@markwhite2207]

@@AlexHernandez-gn6rd not heard it....but just like the observation, which ain't mine, that equality is all nice and good...until it comes to putting the bins out or clearing the gutter...then suddenly gender roles are very clearly defined!...' you got a hairy arse?, YOU change the tyre!

[@jaanisk606]

We are destroying ourselves literally right now

[@RokSlana]

Well that was insightful. Now I can go about my day knowing I don't have listen to this guy ever again.

[@TopeA8]

To add to my previous point. A lot of people do not know, but testosterone does not predict violence, it predicts DOMINANCE. Studies show that increased testosterone does not lead to increase physical violence in environments where the currency of dominance is not physical. The interesting thing about human instincts is that they can be expressed in any number of ways. Toxic masculinity is NOT actually the inherent trait, it is an EXPRESSION. Yes, males innately want to dominate, but that can be expressed in any way. It could be expressed in playing basketball, fishing, knitting, or in more extreme examples - fighting. The goal is not to eliminate males, but to find more productive channels for their dominance, and of course, to ensure that their desire to dominate does not prohibit women from fulfilling their objectives. This is not a paradox, though it can be. It is wrong to look at human outcomes and then retrospectively come to the conclusion that those are our qualities. Those are the EXPRESSIONS of our qualities. The opportunity to improve humanity lies not in simply improving education, it also lies in changing the 'games' that we play. People describe proxies of war, such as cold wars, but war ITSELF is a proxy. We use war to resolve conflict, but conflict can be resolved in any number of ways. Trade wars are not even what I am alluding to. We can realistically resolve conflict PRODUCTIVELY. That is also within our human capabilities. Realistically human beings are actually much better than we realize, we are simply not optimizing our environments and behaviors to best reflect the limits of our innate desires.

[@chatgpt246]

The way i see it, if i'm good at fighting, why would i agree to excert my dominance in a singing competition where i would guaranteed to lose. I should make a case that the best solution for dominance dispute is through fighting. Lets say we remove violence, maybe all that left is people debating each other till the end of time without anything ever accomplished and we would all be stuck in that phase until someone have the idea to knock the other guy in the teeth to reach a conclution. Then we are back to square one.

[@ahmarcamacho8404]

At the end of the day we all know subconsciously that might always makes right

[@willd0047]

@@chatgpt246 well said, very nuanced

[@willd0047]

@@chatgpt246 sometimes ape brain go brr and war happens

[@PaulHigginbothamSr]

The problem seems to me that as time rolls on the amount of damage one country can do another is raised over time with the technology and the actors might change but philosophical differences seem to gain and potentiate over time.

[@GlobalDrifter1000]

Richard’s ring finger is longer than his middle finger.🤷

[@CB-qf8yx]

My dad's three middle fingers were all the same length. So, maybe variability is the norm?

[@Jivanmuktaintraining]

😅

[@GlobalDrifter1000]

@@CB-qf8yx Maybe your dad is from outer space

[@TennesseeJed]

The same greed that got humans to the top of the food chain is the same greed that'll kill them.

[@kangarang]

"the fact that we have not had an accident yet" uh how bout that pandemic

[@hugoarcada]

It was no accident.

[@joeyripswell]

@@hugoarcada 🎯

[@groovycarter]

The consequences are too severe, Oppenheimer’s “ beginning of the end “ actually has prolonged ( thankfully ) the inevitable.

[@jmo7185]

The most vicious awful thing I have ever seen was a street fight between two women. This guy has no clue

[@zanlooney343]

Utopia is just another type of tyranny .

[@camilla470]

This old man is insane.

[@BT-yo3eq]

This guy has some really good insights but in the end somehow seems to completely miss the point of his own research

[@anewman]

I think he was referring to the premise of equilibrium when Lex said taking a pill to remove the conflict removes the fun out of life.

[@la7era1u54]

We haven't destroyed ourselves yet because we have barely reached this kind of power level. All it takes is 1 certain narcissistic personality to rule a certain country that has nuclear weapons who is about to, or fears, losing his power. There are many people out there that wouldn't think twice about killing billions of people, especially when it's not possible for them to feel anything toward another human being. Unless certain precautions are taken, this has a fairly high probability of happening in the future

[@hospitalcleaner]

Short answer: everyone's too afraid to get rekked

[@Peekul1]

Was it a long time between world war I and world war ii?

[@IamAlexM16]

Lex has interviewed a lot of really intelligent people, unfortunately this isnt one of them. There are power hungry, manipulative, dishonest people from both sexes and choosing leaders should always be on a case by case basis based on who we think will do the best job, and should have nothing to do a persons gender.

[@tankerd1847]

I think Mr. Wrangham kind of bit off more than he could chew with his point which I think he approached from a very simplified point of view. I wouldn't say he's not intelligent, he just made an argument that Lex was able to counter very easily. I don't think he's necessarily some hyper-feminist or something, they're engaging in a thought experiment and a discussion. I've watched most of this pod and he's most definitely very intelligent. Not to say I agree with him on his argument, Lex was absolutely right.

[@Ilendir]

The very fact that we're all here today is proof that there is benefit in the duality of mammals, of humans, even if it is just genetic diversity. But most likely goes way beyond that, in caring for the family and children, as well as protecting them. At some point also to send children out into the world and be okay with making their own mistakes, live their life without clinging too much.... I'd recommend to watch some experiments with only women and only men "stranded" on an island and re-evaluate the view that there is no benefit in men in society, or spend a long time with only females, or watch stuff like the bachelor...how does the saying go: Why would you want to understand women? Women understand women and they hate each other... Thank you Lex for grounding the conversation in the end

[@Xokken333]

I would think genetically selecting nonviolent traits would be better than discarding all of sexual dichotomy

[@IRONBYRON3]

My like goes towards Lex's rational yin, to the guest's raging yang.

[@cahlendavidson2921]

I've never seen someone sit with their arms crossed for so long ever in my life

[@jrileycain6220]

Also: Reading many of the comments shows how so many people completely misunderstand the discussion. Like, he's pointing at the moon and they're looking at his finger. Jeez people are idiots. They heard some buzz word and that stops them from listening. They go off on a cliche, bumper sticker tangent based on that and miss the point.

[@jasonshumate6456]

Who wins when a Lion that hasn't ever fought, fights a Lion who's tired but the most deadly in the Jungle.

[@tankerd1847]

I think Lex is completely right. If the human race evolved to be entirely female you would just see females striving and conniving for power. Our differences between the two genders really just means that males tend to fit into that power seeking role better. Women are plenty conniving and evil in their own right, especially amongst each other.

[@tankerd1847]

I also think there's an argument for the "warfare is in human nature" side of it too. Conflict is to some degree inevitable, the key is making it reasonable and non-apocalyptic. If you made a completely female world you would just have females coming into conflict. While there are plenty of female combatants, especially today, males tend to specialize in conflict over females. There's something to be said for the value of half of our species having a biological specialization in fighting for their group's interests. As we go forward into becoming a space-fairing species this isn't going to end, it's likely going to get worse because the order of law and justice will be diminished the further we get from Earth. If we were able to convince all the nations of the world to go all female it would last for a generation or two until groups started fighting and one said "Dang, we'd better bring males back to fight for us." Really thought provoking conversation.

[@belolopez9833]

@3:55 A good response would had been "Have you seen the ending to that one movie called Watchmen?"

[@m4w]

Was just thinking about how psychopaths in power now have nukes. This isn't good for the human race. Psychopaths seem to be the best version of humans, free of neurosis and limitations. If evolution eventually leads us here, it's probably to maintain balance of some sort.

[@UFCSTARS]

I'm on my 4th clip of this dude speaking with, Lex...and I've just realised that he's out of his mind! lol

[@vonBottorff]

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Jeez....

[@nufh]

The great filter.

[@Brodes235]

Wow that took a drastic turn

[@badhombre4942]

The absolute ridiculousness of this conversation.

[@infotainment999]

Well that took a weird turn quickly

[@KD__.]

It's a shame about all the negative comments as this for me was one of the most interesting lex topics of resent times and I didn't expect that. The problem is this clip is it's taken out of context when only listing to a few minutes. I listened to the whole thing on Spotify during my commute and it's fascinating.

[@cloutm_anager8262]

What a weak man. Good times create weak men. Case and point

[@martinzarathustra8604]

You actually prove his argument. But you are not smart enough to realize it.

[@j.a.8970]

Live now.

[@marlou169]

Treat and respect others like you would like to be treated and respected yourself...

[@politicorey8817]

Not a lot of empathy displayed in this comment section towards a thought experiment. I guess Lex doesn't cultivate the sentiment both ways

[@pikkon899]

Because most them only heard "get rid of the males" and posted a comment afterwards while scrolling through the comments section all the while, the rest of the conversation became background noise.

[@cullenheater4547]

It's like honeybee society. They evolved to more or less function without male bees, except for breeding purposes.

[@GringoCurt]

This is not a male or female issue. It's a value system issue. Both males and females are guilty of consuming vital resources at faster rates than they can be regenerated. As long as that persists we'll fight to the death. Breathable air is the only exception. It's our most important resource yet, because of its apparently sustainable abundance, it has never been the reason for a battle. If we don't nuke ourselves first, humanity's value system will evolve. Technology is taking jobs away from humans and we should celebrate it. Eventually, the only human "work" will be done by engineers and technicians. In a sustainable environment, people will not be publicly programmed to think that the objective to this game is, "die with the most stuff". People will eventually value a thing for its usefulness rather than their constant race to keep up with the Joneses. The belief that people own things will become totally ridiculous. Everything that we consider a possession today will be checked out like a library book. If a person is a licensed boat captain, then they may use a boat whenever they'd like. Just drop it off when they're done. When bitcoin inevitably pulls back corrupt veils of power, country borders will begin to disappear. Cities will be redesigned. They will be self-sufficient in sustaining the desires of the people within them. They will not have a negative impact on the natural ecosystems surrounding them. People will freely move from one city to any other. In a sustainable environment, only sporting and intellectual dominance will become important. Men will become different and women will become different. Parents will have the time to properly raise their children. Or, we'll blow ourselves up first.

[@IvaneJ]

Two women in one room long enough is a problem in my house. Women don’t deal well with each other beyond cocktail gatherings.

[@RJay121]

Why is this?

[@ChristopherRyans]

Men have more genetic variation than females. Every now and then it works out really good(more then half never have children because their variation did not produce a more competent individual) and you get a hyper-competent male that goes around and populates the Earth with his superior genetics. Hypergamous women are the ones choosing the men driving the selection. Sexual dimorphism allows our species to be more flexible. One other thing I want to say if you're trying to remove the aggression what are you going to do when something really big comes knocking at the door trying to devour Society. We need hyper-competent males to safeguard our society from threats we do not comprehend at the moment

[@holocene6]

This is the shit you chat at 5am in the kitchen

[@Ivan-pv5fj]

now let's extend his argument to race. oh wait

[@bryanstark1930]

Lol.

[@eldel5806]

Interesting idea. Are we talking the removal of all male types or just the unreasonably Aplha?

[@ChristopherRyans]

The sexual selection is from the hypergamous women that select men for their competence. Sexual dimorphism allows our species to have different forms encapsulated and presented simultaneously in our genetics.

[@Alsahw]

He just quite comfortably said “you somehow get rid of males” imagine if in his opinion, females were the problem!

[@MD-nt9nv]

Putin: Hold my beer…

[@Brandonthesnifferofall]

I always enjoy the body language of interviewees.. not telling by itself, but another data point. I think a lot of people lack true commitment to their point of views now.. prob as a defense. His body language is definitely defensive/protective. I don’t know this man, just interesting.

[@DrZiplock]

Reading these comments a lot of people - who clearly did not watch or listen to the full podcast - seem surprisingly touchy over a thought experiment about removing conflict.

[@marcstephan7650]

With populations increasing and AI robots developing and the decreasing of resources, there is bound to be "tensions" because of the decreasing need for humans.

[@artofexistance]

Humans will be needed to entertain other humans , consult other humans , inspire other humans,

[@RJay121]

Whoa... your comment might be the most insightful.

[@aladdin8623]

Good question! There were indeed many critical situations, which posed to escalate. The Matrix Maker seems to prevent the worse for the sake of peace. Yet we have the free will, to change completely. The question is, do we want that peace or do we want to follow our own desires, which cause the opposite.

[@BT-yo3eq]

It’s unfortunate because his insights are very intriguing. But his conclusion is absolutely absurd. Who even wants to live in a world with zero conflict? Conflict exists for a reason.

[@danielvalleduarte]

When will AI take control of our nuclear footballs and send us all home?

[@emicadic]

At no point in time only men or only women ruled any significant group of humans. The partnership of males and females in humans is one of the biggest reasons humans evolved up to here. The p3oblem is that we (mostly men) made it very hard to find throughout the history the role and importance of women in big events.

[@marcushards6686]

I love this paradigm.

[@BaiZhijie]

I think his comment "we gotta get rid of the males" is pretty tongue in cheek. I think a lot of the KZbin commenters below are taking it more seriously than it was meant.

[@Jivanmuktaintraining]

Richard Wrangham in debate with Jordan Peterson would be a bloodsport.

[@tankerd1847]

Wrangham specializes in primate behavior. If they were talking philosophy then JP would trounce him even harder than Lex did. I don't think Wrangham's a bad guy or even necessarily believes what he's saying, I think he's just having a fun thought experiment with Lex. I don't see him as a radical or something.

[@willsmith9357]

This guy is seriously proposing wiping out half of humanity… including me and my sons… wtf?

[@dms5341]

Your son Jaden is pretty insufferable, to be fair

[@hernerwerzog1278]

Just remember, this man once had more hair than you.

[@cockneyculchi]

Best not to encourage

[@davidnelson7719]

Basically every ICU nursing manager on Earth thinks this guy is wrong.

[@christiansmith-of7dt]

Food that doesn't stink , the key

[@dana.7134]

Notice how cavalier he his about proposing the elimination of all males. He declined to offer himself as tribute to the idea though.