We have the wit to know everything about nothing. These are specialists. But what about generalists, those who know next to nothing about everything, those seeking out the connections and patterns outside of taxonomy?
Ah, but Astrid, look at how passionate you are about your favorite prehistoric critters. Other people can be passionate about other animals, too. Besides, learning about this otherwise insignificant animal can teach us about the places it lived (and you said this yourself): climate, plants, other animals of the time, etc. After all, put yourself in the shoes of paleontologists of the future who come across the fossils of the opossum or the kangaroo rat or the koala. Here we have not very important animals, yet they have their niche to fill, their place in their local ecosystems. Sorry. I used to teach ecosystems as an elementary school Science Lab Teacher, so I've come to think that every animal has its place in the scheme of things, no matter how small or seemingly unimportant.
I appreciate your subject matter stretching more and more towards the interconnectedness of being that's often considered the realm of the spiritual. In my opinion, it's a field of thought that atheism does damage to humanity by ignoring or rebuking.
OK just in defense of atheism and hopefully to shed some light on it. No offense intended but I think some theists quite often have a caracature of atheism that's lacking in nuance (and truth). Firstly I'd argue there are very few rational pure atheists. Agnostic atheists are much more prevalent but for convenience we'll shorten it to "atheism/atheists" and I'll admittedly generalise a bit (dangerous I know). I'll also state that I have no problem if you believe in a theistic-style spiritual connection. Some theists, in what I can only assume is an attempt to feel special, seem to like painting atheists as somehow unfeeling or disconnected just because we do not believe stories that cannot be proven. A lie can make you feel good or bad but it's still a lie. Atheists, when it comes to how our universe works, would rather not rely on a lie. It's a deep and amazing thing to realise that, through a careful examination Nature, we can rationally draw the links of connection between ourselves and the rest of Nature. We don't need a theistic fiction. It's silly (and harmful) to say that atheists can't understand the interwoven nature of the universe and our connection to it and, therefore, others around us. We just rely on evidence to tell the narrative of it and we do not feel the need to embellish it with what appears to be fiction. Atheism/theism doesn't make a person inherently good or bad. Do we want to start generalising theists and tie them all to the most abusive people within their organisations and blame all theists for all the problems in the world? I don't think that helps. Perhaps we should just look at the universe in awestruck wonder, in the way that works best for us as individuals, and work together to make our corner of this grand expanse a little better.
What I have established is to rebrand Maslow's transpersonal as perception of the intangible, funning from empathy through third sector medicine to the numinous, so defined as to avoid the avatars specific to particular religions. In so doing, I've abstracted his concept of the Transpersonal to become transception, alongside the more tangible subclasses of perception, namely neuroception, interoception, proprioception and exteroception, which tend towards the intangible anyway, once they pass the senses.
@@guaporeturns9472 i think OP is referring to the short hair and the "masc" presenting outfits that Astrid wears. Also the name Astrid, come on, that's as gay as gay gets lol
@@alexkota Oh I see. The only other Astrid I am familiar with is Astrid of Sweden (a pretty cool woman in her own right) but didn’t know it had a gay connection. Anyway the only two Astrids I am aware of are quite cool.🙂
Don’t be messed up. It sucks trying to pigeonhole people on such shallow superficial observations, especially regarding people’s personal lives. And, yes, I know Astrid does discuss these topics in other places, but that is another matter.
@@wellesradio No need to get confrontational , they just made a very non offensive observation… nobody pigeonholed anyone…chill tf out and enjoy Astrid and her content , please.
You are always so delightful to listen to and watch.
That^
as someone once said "we are the universe experiencing itself"
Perfectly happy to be just a little dirt guy with bumpy molars.
I've had similar musings about the life, times, and death of a single very old cyanobacteria.
This feels - and I mean this as a compliment - just like a really good vlogbrothers video ❤
We have the wit to know everything about nothing. These are specialists. But what about generalists, those who know next to nothing about everything, those seeking out the connections and patterns outside of taxonomy?
"Le cœur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point."
Love this post , also Badass hair!!! 100 awesome points awarded
Ah, but Astrid, look at how passionate you are about your favorite prehistoric critters. Other people can be passionate about other animals, too.
Besides, learning about this otherwise insignificant animal can teach us about the places it lived (and you said this yourself): climate, plants, other animals of the time, etc. After all, put yourself in the shoes of paleontologists of the future who come across the fossils of the opossum or the kangaroo rat or the koala. Here we have not very important animals, yet they have their niche to fill, their place in their local ecosystems.
Sorry. I used to teach ecosystems as an elementary school Science Lab Teacher, so I've come to think that every animal has its place in the scheme of things, no matter how small or seemingly unimportant.
And the scientists publishing on this little guy have at least one reader. That is not bad.
FEM on molars? Why? How? Why does it explain something that you cannot figure out just by looking at the teeth?
I appreciate your subject matter stretching more and more towards the interconnectedness of being that's often considered the realm of the spiritual. In my opinion, it's a field of thought that atheism does damage to humanity by ignoring or rebuking.
OK just in defense of atheism and hopefully to shed some light on it.
No offense intended but I think some theists quite often have a caracature of atheism that's lacking in nuance (and truth). Firstly I'd argue there are very few rational pure atheists. Agnostic atheists are much more prevalent but for convenience we'll shorten it to "atheism/atheists" and I'll admittedly generalise a bit (dangerous I know). I'll also state that I have no problem if you believe in a theistic-style spiritual connection.
Some theists, in what I can only assume is an attempt to feel special, seem to like painting atheists as somehow unfeeling or disconnected just because we do not believe stories that cannot be proven. A lie can make you feel good or bad but it's still a lie. Atheists, when it comes to how our universe works, would rather not rely on a lie.
It's a deep and amazing thing to realise that, through a careful examination Nature, we can rationally draw the links of connection between ourselves and the rest of Nature. We don't need a theistic fiction.
It's silly (and harmful) to say that atheists can't understand the interwoven nature of the universe and our connection to it and, therefore, others around us. We just rely on evidence to tell the narrative of it and we do not feel the need to embellish it with what appears to be fiction.
Atheism/theism doesn't make a person inherently good or bad. Do we want to start generalising theists and tie them all to the most abusive people within their organisations and blame all theists for all the problems in the world? I don't think that helps.
Perhaps we should just look at the universe in awestruck wonder, in the way that works best for us as individuals, and work together to make our corner of this grand expanse a little better.
What I have established is to rebrand Maslow's transpersonal as perception of the intangible, funning from empathy through third sector medicine to the numinous, so defined as to avoid the avatars specific to particular religions. In so doing, I've abstracted his concept of the Transpersonal to become transception, alongside the more tangible subclasses of perception, namely neuroception, interoception, proprioception and exteroception, which tend towards the intangible anyway, once they pass the senses.
not sure i wanna be remembered
Came for the incredible gay vibes. Stayed for your passion of science and philosophy
Could you please explain to me what the "gay vibes” are that you mentioned? I’m asking a legit question , nothing else , just curious.
@@guaporeturns9472 i think OP is referring to the short hair and the "masc" presenting outfits that Astrid wears. Also the name Astrid, come on, that's as gay as gay gets lol
@@alexkota Oh I see. The only other Astrid I am familiar with is Astrid of Sweden (a pretty cool woman in her own right) but didn’t know it had a gay connection. Anyway the only two Astrids I am aware of are quite cool.🙂
Don’t be messed up. It sucks trying to pigeonhole people on such shallow superficial observations, especially regarding people’s personal lives. And, yes, I know Astrid does discuss these topics in other places, but that is another matter.
@@wellesradio No need to get confrontational , they just made a very non offensive observation… nobody pigeonholed anyone…chill tf out and enjoy Astrid and her content , please.
ily