Down the Wormhole

Episode 142 In part 33 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking to The Rev. Dr. Denise Yarbrough. She is an ordained Episcopal priest with over two decades of dedicated experience in interreligious engagement. She recently retired from the University of Rochester, where she served as the director of religious and spiritual life. In that role, she oversaw the interfaith chapel, guided student groups, and taught religion courses centered on interreligious dialogue and the intersection of public health and religion.    Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 141 In part 32 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking to Dr. Hannah Giunta-Stibb. She is a neonatologist and pediatric pulmonologist at Nationwide Children’s Hospital in Columbus, OH. In addition to her clinical work, Hannah has a PhD in bioethics and does research on critical decision-making and family communication.    Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 140 In part 31 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are doing a different sort of thing. Today, we have the privilege of speaking with Rev. Dr. Katie Givens Kime who is the CEO of the Alliance for Christian Media and Exec. Producer of Day1 broadcasting. Joining us as well is the founding director of Sinai and Synapses, the Rabbi Geoff Mitelman. We wanted to get the three of us together to talk a little about the changing landscapes of media, communication, and how we make meaningful content in this algorithmically obsessed world. The resulting conversation was uplifting, inspiring, insightful, and at times surprisingly hilarious.    Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 139 In part 30 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr. Olapeju Simoyan. She is an addiction medicine physician and an adjunct professor in the Department of Psychiatry at Drexel University College of Medicine. She also holds adjunct faculty positions at Penn State University College of Medicine and Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine. She is also an author and photographer, seeking to make both science and faith relatable to people of all ages.   Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 138 In part 29 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr. David Adler Gold. He is a geobiologist, combining genetics and the fossil record to study the relationship between Earth and life over long timescales. He has worked on problems as old as the origin of complex life, and as recent as the effects of global warming on marine invertebrates. David got his PhD at UCLA working with Dr. David Jacobs. He then went on to do postdoctoral fellowships at MIT (with Dr. Roger Summons) and Caltech (with Dr. Lea Goentoro) before joining the faculty at UC Davis. In addition to his research, Dr. Gold is also the manager of the UC Davis Fossil Collection and the Faculty Director of the UC Davis CalTeach/MAST Program, which trains STEM undergraduates to become K-12 teachers.   Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 137 In part 28 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Andrew Rick-Miller. He is a co-founder and the current Executive Director of Science for the Church, a ministry seeking to help strengthen the church through engagement with science. Previously, he spent more than ten years with the John Templeton Foundation, most recently leading the Religious Engagement Department.    Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 136 In part 27 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Rev. Danny Lybarger. Danny is the Lead and Founding Pastor of The Well, a vibrant and inclusive United Methodist Church plant in Weldon Spring, MO, known for its commitment to creating safe spaces for all, especially those traditionally marginalized by the church. With a BA from George Fox University and an M.Div from United Theological Seminary, Danny combines theological depth with a passion for bridging the gap between faith and everyday life. Under his leadership, The Well has experienced significant growth and has been viewed as a compelling new model for ministry at the intersection of inclusivity and evangelicalism. Outside of pastoring, Danny enjoys spending time with his family, staying active at CrossFit St. Louis, and coaching his kids’ sports teams.   Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 135 In part 26 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr. Randy Wedin. He is a freelance science writer and a Lay Teacher at the Minnesota Zen Meditation Center (MZMC). He earned his PhD in Chemistry at Harvard University and his BA in Chemistry and English Literature at St. Olaf College (Minnesota). As a science writer, he uses his communication skills to bridge the gap between the worlds of science, business, government, and the public. He has research and writing experience on a broad range of science-related topics, from green chemistry, drug development, and sustainability to smart grid, public outreach, and K-12 science education. In addition, he has written creative nonfiction essays and op-ed articles for general audiences on subjects related to parenting, relationships, and daily life, often using metaphors from the world of science to provide new perspectives on these topics. His current focus at MZMC is on exploring the relationship of science and Zen Buddhism in his dharma talks and a six-week course he taught on “Zen and Science”.   Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 134 How do our religious communities become breeding grounds for bad science and misinformation? Is religion itself to blame or is there something else at work? Secret foreskin heists, biblical breakfast wisdom, and a cure for ignorance!   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 133 In part 25 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Rabbi Daniel Swartz. He is the spiritual leader at Temple Hesed of Scranton and Executive Director of the Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life (COEJL). Previously, Rabbi Swartz held leadership positions with Greater Washington Interfaith Power and Light, the National Religious Partnership for the Environment, the Children’s Environmental Health Network, and the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.  He is the lead author and editor of “To Till and To Tend: A Guide for Jewish Environmental Study and Action” as well as “Faith Communities and Environmental Health."   Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 132 The Trump Administration has waged an all out war on gender and sex. They claim to be motivated by "common sense science" and religious truths, but are disingenuous and incomplete on both fronts. We talk about the actual science of biological sex, the Talmud's surprisingly expansive view of gender, why this is such a pressing issue, and how we can stand up for truth and dignity.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 131 In part 24 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr Taylor Thomas. She is an interdisciplinary scholar, artist, and educator specializing in philosophy and religion. Currently, she serves as a part-time philosophy instructor and a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for Mind and Culture. Her research focuses on developing interdisciplinary frameworks to address moral agency in today's complex world, aiming to overcome challenges that suppress awareness, freedom, and opportunity. In addition to her academic pursuits, Dr. Thomas engages in creative endeavors, aiming to make existential musings tangible and relatable through multimedia experiences. She is also the host of the "Tillich Today" podcast, which explores the ideas of theologian and philosopher Paul Tillich.   https://taylormariethomas.squarespace.com/ https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/tillich-today/id1725855909 https://www.youtube.com/@BYTE-GEIST   Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 130 In part 23 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr Fred Ledley. He is a professor of natural & applied science and management at Bentley University in Waltham, MA and director of the center for integration of science and industry. A physician and pediatrician by training, he has performed research in genomics on the faculties of the Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Children’s Hospital, and Howard Hughes Medical Institute and founded several biotechnology companies focused on gene therapy or personalized medicine. A widely published researcher, his current work focuses on advancing the translation of scientific discoveries for public value by developing synergies between science, medicine, business, and public policy. He has previously participated in the national, NIH-funded program in “Genetics, Religion and Ethics”, part of the ELSI program of the Human Genome project, and a Templeton-funded program “New Visions in Science, Nature and Religion” at US Santa Barbara. He has written a novel, Sputnik’s Child, which explores how science and technology became a faith for members of the baby boom generation and the limits of this faith. He plays clarinet in Shpilkes Klezmer Band and has served on the board of the Boston Jewish Music Festival, Jewish Arts Collaborative, and Celebrity Series of Boston. He joined in a Bnai Mitzvah with his wife, Tamara, at age 31, occasionally reads Torah and serves as darshan as a member of Temple Aliyah in Needham MA, and considers music, hiking the forest, and observing solar eclipses to be spiritual experiences. Check out his book, "Sputnik's Child" here - https://amzn.to/4dgiZAD   Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 129 Why do smart people believe dumb things? We unpack cognitive biases, like how judges might deny parole just because they're hungry (or maybe not?). Learn why Steve Jobs wore black turtlenecks, why knowing a little Greek makes pastors dangerous, and why acknowledging your biases doesn't make you immune to them. Plus, we touch on misinformation, trusting experts, and why sometimes, the best advice is to stop learning stuff. It's bias all the way down!   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 128 In part 22 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr Ciara Reyes-Ton. She is a biologist, science writer, and editor who is passionate about science communication to faith communities. She has a Ph.D. in Cell & Molecular Biology from the University of Michigan. She has served as Managing Editor for the American Scientific Affiliation’s God & Nature Magazine. She is currently the Digital Content Editor for BioLogos and an Adjunct Professor at Lipscomb University. She also recently helped found the Science Communicators of Faith (SCF), a group dedicated to providing a supportive, collaborative, and Christ-centered community for people of all backgrounds and skill levels to grow in the craft of science communication. She is also the author of “Look Closely,” a science and faith devotional that explores the life of Christ by bringing scripture in conversation with science, from water-walking lizards to dividing cells and resurrecting corals. Outside science, she has a heart for worship and is a proud mom. https://www.mountcarmell.com/   Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 127 In part 21 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Rabbi Dr Jack Shlachter.    Jack Shlachter is a physicist who worked at Los Alamos National Laboratory for over thirty years with briefer stints at Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, the Atomic Energy Agency, and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization, the latter two based in Vienna, Austria; he led both the Physics Division and Theoretical Division during his LANL career. In parallel, Jack is an ordained rabbi who led the Jewish congregation in Los Alamos for many years, was the rabbi in Center Moriches, NY, during his years at Brookhaven, and now serves as rabbi of HaMakom, a congregation in Santa Fe, NM as well as the Los Alamos Jewish Center. He has also provided itinerant rabbinic support to far-flung Jewish communities including those in Vienna, Austria,  Beijing, China, and Warsaw, Poland.   Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 125 This conversation was recorded at the Sinai and Synapses alumni gathering in November 2023. In it, we talk with Dr. Briana Pobiner about the earliest cannibals, fad diets, and what life was like for our paleolithic predecessors.    When you're done with this episode, make sure to check out her other interviews as well!  https://www.downthewormhole.com/e/human-origins-part-1-with-briana-pobiner-big-questions-and-little-bones/ https://www.downthewormhole.com/e/elevating-the-discourse-with-briana-pobiner-paleoanthropologist/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 125 In part 21 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with JD Stillwater.  He is a science ambassador and author who writes and speaks about profound insights from natural reality, insights that drive paradigm shifts, and cultural awakening. He is an officer of the Religious Naturalist Association, and serves on the governing Council of the Institute on Religion in an Age of Science.   JD Stillwater - https://www.jdstillwater.earth/ Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 124 We're back! After over two years, we have recorded a new episode, but it's better than that. We've actually recorded a couple of new episodes with a plan in place to record dozens more. Oh, and we have a whole host of interviews lined up with fascinating people that we know you will love. It feels more important than ever to be able to talk about science and religion, and we can't wait to continue this journey with you.    In the meantime, we thought it might be fun to talk about what we talk about when we talk about science and religion. Is that the most confusing possible way to say that? Probably, but it works. So join us for a conversation that touches on wonder, trauma, politics, miracles, and unexpected pathways to the divine.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 123 This conversation was recorded at the Sinai and Synapses alumni gathering in November 2023. In it, we talk with Dr. Muhammad Aurangzeb Ahmad about the ethics of AI in Islam, the future of human-computer interaction, and the ethics of bringing a form of consciousness back to life.  Muhammad Aurangzeb Ahmad is a Research Scientist at University of Washington’s Harborview Medical Center and an Affiliate Assistant Professor in the Department of Computer Science at University of Washington Bothell. His research focuses on algorithmic nudging at scale, simulation modeling for machine learning, Responsible AI, and personality emulation. He has had academic appointments at University of Washington, Center for Cognitive Science at University of Minnesota, Minnesota Population Center, and the Indian Institute of Technology at Kanpur. Muhammad also has worked in applied AI in industry for several startups and advisor to various governmental bodies. He has a PhD in Computer Science from the University of Minnesota.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    9bi2pvCS8hJHF73c6ylI RV4OTIqNAXnB5lL73y59

Episode 122 Today we are joined by author, speaker, and podcaster Rob Bell to talk about his new novel "Where'd You Park Your Spaceship". We talk about delighting in our work, a faith that could survive the end of the world, and how a book about spaceships and distant planets has more to do with what it means to be human than anything he's written before.    Rob Bell is the New York Times Bestselling author of fourteen books and plays which have been translated into 25 languages. His visual art can be seen on Instagram @realrobbell, his band is HUMANS ON THE FLOOR, and his podcast is called The RobCast. Rob lives with his family in Ojai, California. https://robbell.com/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    Transcript (AI Generated) Zack Jackson (00:22.558) Our guest today is the bestselling author of 14 books and plays, international speaker and host of the Robcast. orb (00:30.161) Okay. Zack Jackson (00:46.582) He lives in Ojai, California, where he hosts two-day small group gatherings, that which you can and should sign up for right now. Link in the description. It is my pleasure and honor to welcome Rob Bell to this podcast. Hey, Rob. Ian Binns (01:02.341) Hey Rob. orb (01:02.45) Hello, fellas. Thanks for having me on. Zack Jackson (01:05.322) Oh, thanks for spending your morning with us. So I have in my hand this very, um, strange and wonderful novel called where'd you park your spaceship? Which even I know the title still to this day brings a smile to your face. Um, the book starts with the line. Ian Binns (01:08.122) Yeah. orb (01:27.205) just to hear you say it, just to hear you say it. Ian Binns (01:30.62) I loved it. Zack Jackson (01:32.21) So the first line in the book is, the earth didn't make it, it got brown balled. Which in total caps, brown balled. Then we meet characters named Heen Grubears, Moogie Fallers and Sir Pong. There's a family game like two pages in where you intentionally slam your head into a fork. And then without any explanation, we have a sentence that says, We took her to the Thrival in our circle that night. So from like the very beginning of this book, I got the feeling that this wasn't going to be a book about a carefully crafted universe or a book about like a message being hammered on over and over again. This was not a carefully crafted universe. This was a novel just stuffed to the brim with delight. Like your absolute delight in your characters, in their alien world, it just comes through so clearly. Can you maybe just tell us a little bit about your relationship to the story and to the people who live in here? orb (02:45.69) What a wonderful setup slash question. Yeah, and honestly. Zack Jackson (02:48.226) Ha ha ha. orb (02:54.101) All I had was delight. I don't have training as a writer. I don't have a background. I haven't really read science fiction. I guess Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. I don't, other than that, I like, all there was, and my work for roughly 30 years has been explaining. That's what like a spiritual teacher does, which is a very particular engagement of the mind. And I had some sense that something was ending, something I'd been doing. It was like an achy, angsty, like a death feeling, like a cellular death. Like you've been doing a thing and it's coming to an end. Don't numb the pain, just let it die. And this story came roaring in. And the only way it worked was what happens next. Like a very innocent, tender, who appears? What are they wearing? What's their name? and that explaining energy. Well, obviously, if you watch a movie and it's clear what the point of the movie is, you're like, ugh, we say heavy-handed, on the nose. You know what I mean? We're out. So it was like taking all of these muscles that I've built up over the years. Like a number of my earlier books, like Love Wins is a thesis. It's an argument. It's a like point A, point B, point C. This relates to this. Zack Jackson (04:07.138) Oh yeah. Zack Jackson (04:17.613) Mm. orb (04:21.905) Here's what I just told you. Here's another example of what I just told you. And this, the delight that you're describing, this was like, all of that was like a kill switch. If any of that earlier musculature was engaged, then immediately it's like crimping a garden hose. No water could come through. It only worked with like, or like the scene where Nune gives her bread is magic speech in the ravine. I was. Zack Jackson (04:33.493) Mm. Zack Jackson (04:44.413) interesting. Zack Jackson (04:49.78) Mm-hmm. orb (04:50.633) in the ravine for like three or four days. Kind of knowing she was going to do something spectacular and he was going to be like, oh my god, what did I just witness? But also not knowing how. So it was like this surreal, almost like a fugue or a trance. Like I, I am creating this and I don't know what's going to happen next. Zack Jackson (05:18.526) Yeah, it's like in that scene, you do something that you do a lot in this book, which is like, you present a situation like, Oh, so-and-so has to pick so-and-so to do this demonstration, who are they going to pick? And then they pick the person and you're just like, of course they picked them because this, that, and the other, but you don't explain the, the intricate backstory behind why everything happens. You're just like, well, of course it happened that way. orb (05:31.824) Yes! orb (05:35.557) Nixie flugers! Ugh. Ian Binns (05:38.492) Thanks for watching! Zack Jackson (05:44.67) And after that happened, like three times I was on board and I was like, well, yeah, of course that happened that way. I don't need a big explanation. There's something happening right now. Let's, let's see this thing that's happening right now. Acknowledge the complexity around it and just look at it. orb (05:57.133) And like, oh, and that scene when, when Nuneye then has the guy that she picks, picks somebody and he picks, who does he pick? He picks Kixie Flugers. Oh my God, picks you, and it's like scandal. The whole school erupts. And then Heen is like, this is obviously a big deal. And then Lines says to Heen's, oh my God, Kixie Flugers used to be with him, but then she was dating so-and-so. And he gives like classic universal high school drama. And you're on another planet that you've just made up sometime in the future and yet god dune picks kixi flugers and kixi flugers looks like a kixi flugers would look like it's just it's just the absurdity of it oh god it's just so enjoyable Zack Jackson (06:35.566) Clearly, right? Zack Jackson (06:44.957) That definitely came across. Ian Binns (06:47.524) Um, one thing I want to just say, Zach will tell you, I'm the, you know, I'm definitely the, the cohost on the show that just goes off on tangents, but you always say there are no tangents. And I, I actually, uh, have that as like a banner on my computer. Cause I love that phrase, but, um, so I. Then working on this huge grant proposal, do all these different things. And so I had a hard time sitting down to read it. And then it was. orb (06:58.377) There are no, yeah, right. orb (07:03.485) Hahaha Ian Binns (07:13.912) And we knew this was coming up and then Zach said, well, good news for you. And then I got your email that the audio version just got released and I, I paid for the Kindle version of the book. And so I, you know, got the audio, um, the audio version of it. And I love the fact that you read it, um, and synced it all up. And so I was telling Zach right before he came on that, you know, I was maybe a hundred pages then when I started listening and, and then I thought, you know, I really want to hear Rob say Brown bald. So I went all the way back to the beginning and restarted the whole book, just so I could experience that. And I think that really connects because you had an episode, you released an episode recently for your own podcast, keep the tears in, or do I keep the tears or something? I can't leave the tears in. And I had not gotten to that part of the book yet. I was right before it, didn't really give anything away. So I was good with that. Zack Jackson (07:44.931) Yes. orb (08:01.774) Oh yeah, leave the tears in? Yeah. Ian Binns (08:13.228) Um, but what I loved about that episode, and it's funny cause I, you know, highlighted all throughout the book, made all these little annotations and notes. Many of the notes that I made was I love that you're laughing while reading this. I love that your emotions are coming out. It's, I mean, it connected me more to the book and the characters than I think listen to it regularly. And then you release that episode and talked about your experiences in the past and then experience with this one. orb (08:31.159) Mmm. Mm-hmm. orb (08:37.346) Mm-hmm. Ian Binns (08:40.984) I know you talked about maybe a little bit in the episode, but how did it feel just letting you be you while reading your work? orb (08:50.745) like a rebirth, like the other work that I've gotten to do over the years was like a warm-up. When I first had written this and knew no publisher is gonna want this, no one may ever read it, but I shared it with a couple friends and like one friend was like, this is what it's actually like to be your friend. I was like, are you kidding? I was so... Ian Binns (08:52.632) Yeah? Can you explain more? Ian Binns (09:00.794) Yeah. Zack Jackson (09:06.478) the Ian Binns (09:13.177) Yeah. orb (09:21.069) it disruptive in the very best way, because I had some sense like, why does, how am I, however old I was at the time, 51, and what is age? But how do I feel like I'm, this feels, yeah, it had some like coming home feeling. And even publishing, like classic New York publishing, there are, Zack Jackson (09:40.279) Hmm. Ian Binns (09:40.388) Yeah. Well, go ahead. orb (09:49.845) which was very good to me. And yet some sense like right away with the book, I was like, if I take this into a publisher, they're gonna be like, yeah, this isn't a Rob Bell book. I remember thinking, but I'm Rob Bell. So I distinctly remember thinking, oh my God, if you'll have to just do this on your own and it'll probably cost. And so it became like a rearranging my life. Like. Zack Jackson (10:00.517) Hahaha! orb (10:17.765) Hence, I'm like in the corner of a garage, like starting over. And then, oh yeah, I'll have to just make the audio book myself, but each step of like, this could really not work, no one may care, became oddly like a blinking green light. Like, are you okay following what feels like an even deeper level of self? Ian Binns (10:36.837) Yeah. orb (10:46.713) even if it means you like are some guy who lost the plot and he's in a garage in Ojai talking about spaceships. But then I would share it with friends. Literally there are friends who are like, I just read the draft of this thing you sent me. It gave me a couple of days to recover because it affected me so deeply. It's the most personal thing you've ever done. And I'd be like, what is, what? So it just like the Tao Te Ching, unknowing, knowing and unknowing. It had a very Zen like. Ian Binns (10:53.613) Yeah. Ian Binns (11:12.475) Yeah. orb (11:16.357) Rob Bell, you know nothing about how everything works. And especially the work for years was like right down the middle. This is what I'm saying, this is what I just said. This is an example of it. And this is every single interaction about this story is like people like, yeah, my mom died three years ago. I'm trying to like the most personal, it was like instantly I was talking, we were connecting on some, Ian Binns (11:27.696) Mm-hmm. orb (11:45.633) other level, you know what I mean? Which was like, I obviously people know about this with fiction and literature for thousands of years, but for me, you're right. Some discovery of some self, like some more, I don't know how you even say it, because we're all just sort of step by step by step. Ian Binns (11:47.076) Yeah, yeah. Zack Jackson (11:47.543) Yeah. Ian Binns (12:02.532) Well, and I loved the fact, you know, as I said, you know, I was already connecting with the story and the characters, but then hearing you read it. So the, one of the reasons why I love listening to your podcast is because I feel, I feel like you always start off with hello friends. And then when you name the title, you usually laugh and you always talk about the importance of laughing. And, and so I feel like we're, it's a connection, right? That you're developed because you're being who I assume is you. Um, you're being very personable. Um, orb (12:26.733) Yeah, yeah, yeah. Ian Binns (12:32.22) You know, I've sat in on several of your classes throughout the pandemic. These are online. It, I got the same feeling. And then when reading this, it just, it was like a very long or multiple podcast episodes, and you just sounded like you were really enjoying yourself. orb (12:39.387) Mm-hmm. orb (12:44.424) Yeah. really enjoying myself. And even when I started thinking, because I would come in at the end of the day when I was writing and say to Kristen, like, this is what Dill Tud did today. She'd be like, and she would just say, my God, you just love to talk about your characters. And honestly, other books was like, the book goes out, you do some interviews, quote unquote promotion, and then onto the next thing. It was like a window of time where you're out, whatever touring, and this was like. Oh, wait, if I actually released this, I would talk about this for the rest of my life. It was like, so yeah, very personal. Like, oh no, I would be doing this. This is like the most enjoyable thing I could think of. Talking to you guys is like, oh my God, we're gonna have another discussion about where'd you park your spaceship? I'm so excited. So it jumbled, like even if you think about like, free market economics, if you make something that you gotta go out and hustle. Ian Binns (13:22.426) Yeah. Zack Jackson (13:36.659) Yeah. If I. orb (13:44.473) it like just obliterated even that stuff. Or recording the audio book like didn't be, you know, another platform, another, it became like, oh my God, that would be so fun to like read it and like turn the pages like I'm just reading it to you. Cause when I am writing a book in this book, I would call friends and read them scenes without them having any context for the story. I'd give them like 10 seconds of context and then just read them. Zack Jackson (13:44.632) Hmm. Ian Binns (14:08.464) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (14:08.567) Hmm orb (14:11.717) the first time that Dill Todd walks up and talks to Heen. Cause I knew if this scene, but like I remember multiple scenes where I would have them, I would read it to somebody, I'd call a friend and just be like, Hey, can I read you this scene? And almost like if the scene works with absolutely no context, and I was like, Oh, we're onto something. It's good, but very personal. So if you feel that in the audio book, Ian Binns (14:16.048) which I thought was great by the way. Ian Binns (14:36.696) Yeah. Zack Jackson (14:36.814) Hmm. orb (14:41.469) That delights me because that's actually what it's felt like. Ian Binns (14:46.436) Well, and if I can, I know Zach, you wanted to say something, but I told Zach this too. Well, you know, over the last couple of weeks. So, um, I had to, uh, I was doing a lot of pickup. My, my son goes to a school that's a Mandarin language immersion program. And so he, we have taken him to a hub stop and pick him up from there. And so I was constantly listening to it in the car and he's, he's 13, I have 13 year old boy, girl twins. And so he would get in, you know, I'd take him to the bus in the morning. Zack Jackson (14:47.02) Yeah. Ian Binns (15:13.912) And he would listen to it with me and then I would listen to it some throughout the day. Uh, and then when I'd pick him up, he would come in and then all of a sudden, yeah, he's like, okay, so wait, dad, what's going on now? Um, but I had to keep moving forward to get it done. And so finally I just said, it's like, okay, buddy, I need to give you the book. You need to listen to it and read it, you know, and hopefully he will, but he, he was really getting into it. And every time you would laugh or someone that I'm like, did you hear him laugh? That's great. Isn't it? So. orb (15:20.401) He's missed some of that. He's missed it. Zack Jackson (15:25.879) Ha ha ha. orb (15:42.137) And you're like, your son's like, can you, can you just rewind to when I got out of the car for school? And you're like, no, no. I mean, I love you. Right. I love you, but not that much. Like I gotta know what happens next. I'm not going to, I already know that part. Ian Binns (15:45.388) Yeah. No, I I'm preparing to talk to him. Yeah. Yeah, so is neat. I mean he and he I love that it he connected with it as well. I thought it was really neat. Zack Jackson (15:58.316) Right. Zack Jackson (16:03.842) Well, I mean, every single part of this, the plot of this book is laid out on the back of the book, but you just have no idea what any of those words mean until you read the book. orb (16:12.201) Good, good, good. I love the idea of laying out the whole thing right before you, the whole where it's headed, in such a way that it's even more mystery. Yeah. Zack Jackson (16:26.506) Right? Like I read the back and then Nunez shows up and he learns that she's assigned seven sent to Ferdus to do a graining. And I'm like, well, I don't know what that means, but three quarters of the way through the book. I was like, oh yeah, that was on the back of the book. I get it now. orb (16:32.357) Yeah, good, good. Just word salad. I was like just. orb (16:42.277) Yes, so like there's a words, there's a, there's a word salad thing you can do that is, oh, you want a description on the back of the book? It's almost like a spoof of a description on the back of the book. Okay, I'll give you a detailed description of what happens in this book. You know, almost like, like a wink to the publishing world. It's like, you gotta give them a full, you know, like the Instagram video, you gotta hook them in the first three seconds. It's like a, all these conventional wisdom rules. They're like, okay. Zack Jackson (16:55.79) Hmm. Zack Jackson (17:01.486) Thanks for watching! Zack Jackson (17:08.178) Mm-hmm. orb (17:12.865) Okay, I could do the rule, but I'm going to do it so over the top, but it's like laughing at it. It's memeing itself. Zack Jackson (17:20.382) Oh, it's so, it's so, I mean, you say you've read Douglas Adams and that comes through so much. It's like, I'm reading this book and I'm thinking like, this is the sort of flippant irreverent hilarity of, of like Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. But with like that sort of laser focused, this is what it means to be human of C.S. Lewis. You know, when you're reading one of his allegorical stories. orb (17:26.054) I'm sorry. orb (17:44.041) Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Zack Jackson (17:47.178) And you're like, Oh yeah, I am a demon. You're right. Not really, but you know, I, I also say those things. I definitely that definitely came through. orb (17:47.342) Mmm. Ian Binns (17:50.524) Hehehe orb (17:53.401) Yeah, wow. Wow. That's fascinating. Ian Binns (17:58.968) And see, I didn't... Go ahead. Zack Jackson (17:59.234) So can I make an observation? Okay. And then you can tell me if I'm totally off because you said a little bit before that people would tell you this is the most Rob Bell we've ever read. This is just coming through so naturally. This feels like a new thing. But when I look at the books you've put out at least, there seems to be a kind of trajectory to it where your pastoral works are these short books that wrestle with a topic creatively and with fun images that are easy to preach, but they very much feel like sermon series. And then that goes on until you wrote, what is the Bible, which feels like you're letting us in on the like the mechanics of how you read the Bible and all of the things that grounded your previous works. Now you've given us the tools to do that too. And then you wrote everything is spiritual, which is that but for the soul. orb (18:47.567) Mmm. Zack Jackson (18:58.826) Here is the kind of the magnum opus of what it means to be all the work I've done. So I feel like if you read what is the Bible and everything is spiritual, it's almost like an accidental discipleship where now you can now read the world the way Rob Bell reads the world. You don't need me to write these little pastoral books anymore. Now I'm free to go on and explore this other more. orb (19:00.165) Wow! orb (19:24.882) Mmm. Zack Jackson (19:25.538) fictional world. I don't want to call it allegorical because I know it's not, this isn't Pilgrim's Progress or anything. But it almost felt like you were freeing yourself by giving us the tools to do the things that Rob Bell did in the world for so long. orb (19:30.953) Oh yeah, that's a really... orb (19:40.989) Well, it's so interesting that you say that because like I came, I was, I was born and raised in this particular Christian tradition that was called itself evangelical, which meant Protestant, which Protestant is like, how do we change the world? A guy nailed a bunch of theses to a door in Germany. Like how do you deal with the pain of the world? Think and. Zack Jackson (20:03.174) No. orb (20:08.729) stuff. And at some level, it's like a disembodied propositions, get them right in your head, get the furniture arranged right in your head, and then you're good. And at some level, I can see a long, slow learning to be in my body. I mean, I remember in my early 20s, discovering that Jesus was a Jewish rabbi, being like, wait a second. Zack Jackson (20:09.954) Yeah, thinking stuff. orb (20:37.937) Like he's actually talking about economics. Everything is economics and politics and social fabric and safety net and how you relate to the currency of the empire. So that's really interesting what you just outlined is it started with like almost like standing there telling people stuff and then it just keeps sinking more and more incarnation, more and more body until we're like, well, here's how you can read that and then it becomes Ian Binns (20:38.917) Yeah orb (21:07.569) Here's the events in this body that shaped me. And then at some point you toss out, we don't even have to do concepts anymore. We can just go right to worlds. I just picture it just like just sinking more and more and more and more into body until there's no propositions left because it's just written, like written on the heart essentially. Zack Jackson (21:20.718) Mm-hmm. Yeah. Zack Jackson (21:32.35) Yeah. Oh, that's what's so great about science fiction. And this is like science fiction ish. Just in that it takes place on another planet, but orb (21:38.037) Yeah. One interviewer on a science fiction podcast was like, other than planets and space ship, other planets and space ship, what makes a science fiction? And I was like, I didn't say that. Don't ask me. Zack Jackson (21:55.086) That's what Kurt Vonnegut said that. He said, I'm, I'm a science fiction writer because somebody told me I was. orb (22:01.093) Right, I'm like, I'm not making claims here. Zack Jackson (22:05.702) But that's the beauty, that's the like the best of science fiction is we take what it means to be human and we play it out on a stage that's so outrageous that it's not going to too closely allegorize, but we can work out in them what's happening here with us. Ian Binns (22:10.501) Mm-hmm. orb (22:21.501) Oh, and it just comes in like Game of Thrones. I don't know where Westeros is. But I know greed. I can I know that feeling. Ian Binns (22:27.468) Oh yeah. Yeah. Zack Jackson (22:30.973) Uh-huh. orb (22:35.089) That's really well said. That's funny. Zack Jackson (22:39.318) So in this universe of yours, the earth gets brownballed in the first sentence, which means we basically destroyed the topsoil and nothing can grow. Our atmosphere is polluted. There's nothing living left on it. Everything is brown now. And we had to leave. The humanity had to go out into the stars and colonize other planets with hopefully a bit more intentionality. So imagining that universe. What do you think those people who left Earth, those people who were religious, how do you think that sort of thing would affect their view of God, the divine? How do we bring God with us to the stars? orb (23:24.069) Right, right, because the... orb (23:29.678) you're going to have to have some understanding that can handle that. Which in some ways has been all along. Apocalypse is often looming. I mean, you think about how many texts apocalypse is looming. I mean, think about how many saviors. The only way I can make you think I'm a savior is if I can show you politically, religiously otherwise, I have to be able to show you an apocalypse to show you your need for someone to save you from it. Zack Jackson (23:33.848) Yeah. Zack Jackson (23:57.339) Mm. orb (23:58.473) and even the crashing of the stock market, I'll protect you because it's coming. You know, that's like a thing. Why 2K? Think of how many of these. I have the answer to help you escape becoming wrath. So perhaps sometimes those arise in order to destroy whatever conception is so limited that it's actually dependent on avoiding that thing. Whatever it is, if it's ultimate reality, all of it has to exist within, it has to be able to handle even that. Zack Jackson (24:21.134) Mmm. Ian Binns (24:21.177) Right. orb (24:30.053) You know, like if a story, if you're animating myth, AKA your religion, that which holds you together can't absorb the earth not making it, then you need to get a new one. Zack Jackson (24:30.285) Yeah. Zack Jackson (24:47.334) I imagine people in that universe did. They would have had to. orb (24:49.293) Well, imagine, yeah, imagine, well, I mean, we have very straightforward examples of this, like Galileo's like, we're not actually the center. There's something called the sun, which is the center. And you have a whole hierarchical worldview, which keeps lots of different people above other people. And you have that system going, no, no. And he's like, well, actually, we just have this thing called a telescope. We figured out how to make glass out of sand. We put two of them in a metal tube. You can see. Ian Binns (25:17.634) Mm-hmm. orb (25:18.621) Um, we have very real examples of this in not so recent history when new information or new events shatter. Whatever the story is, it's holding people together and it either doubles down. Oh, here's one America's the greatest nation on the face of the earth. Hmm. You just lost in Afghanistan to a group of locals using weapons that they got from Russia in the eighties. Ian Binns (25:36.632) Yeah. orb (25:47.805) You know what I mean? Like the greatest military superpower lost. Like Taliban won, America zero. So like you either readjust your narrative or you double down and now the absurdity really gets amped up. So you're right, they have to, they have to at some way, yeah, like whatever wasn't big enough has to get big fast. Ian Binns (25:59.853) Yeah. Zack Jackson (26:17.738) Yeah. Most of the apocalyptic literature in the Bible, at least, is like, here's the end of your world. Here's the end of everything you know. Your whole system stops working. The enemies are winning. And then there is hope because God stops it before the ultimate end. So I imagine in this world that's dying, there's all these people with this like religious faith that's built on that sort of thing. That's like God would never let the earth die. Ian Binns (26:18.021) Yeah. orb (26:27.493) Right, right, right. orb (26:36.474) Right. Zack Jackson (26:47.19) That's the end. That's the stop of the suffering. The earth is it. And then as the earth continues to die, they have to reevaluate, oh goodness, what is the end then? What is the next thing? What is the next thing that's more expansive, that's higher that. orb (26:59.462) Right. And that's what I, and when I learned that the earth brown balled, and I like that sentence, when I learned that the earth brown balled, because I had to explain how to get a guy on Ferdus asking a guy, we had to like, what was so interesting to me is, oh, take the worst fear in the air right now and just have it happen. Just have that be the starting point. It's like in a marriage. Think about a marriage, a couple has an argument that just keeps coming up. Zack Jackson (27:11.769) Hahaha! Zack Jackson (27:21.387) Mm. orb (27:30.593) Try the three of us to imagine that. There's some issue that keeps, sort of keeps coming up. And all of a sudden, one day in the midst of an argument, one of the partners says to the other, well, if we're gonna stay together, we're gonna need to get to the root of this. But they've never ever remotely discussed or considered not staying together. But the one of them said it. And there's like a holy terror of like, wait, did you just say that? But you the observer, if you were observing the argument, it'd be like, that's like one of the best things they could have said, because they're gonna probably get, so it's like speak the unspeakable, and notice how the nervous system weirdly relaxes. There's an openness, even like a democracy is an experiment. Well, some experiments fail. Like just take all the terror of January 6th, take all the terror of election. Ian Binns (28:03.501) Right. Zack Jackson (28:14.627) Hmm. orb (28:26.929) Medley just take it all and go. Yeah, it did it was an experiment some experiments fail and Weirdly enough and affection arises maybe even imagination Which I think I knew even I mean the thing that really is interesting to me and what you were just saying Zach is Jesus isn't like oh, let's do everything we can to keep the temple together. He's like, oh, yeah this whole thing's This whole idea that the divine dwells in a building Yeah, fine for like Ian Binns (28:32.773) Yeah. orb (28:56.781) not one stone will remain on top of another. It's almost like he's like, in order for you all to understand that the whole earth is a temple, that all of it's holy and sacred, yeah, it might need to come down. He doesn't seem to be shy away from, if that's what it'll take, fine. Zack Jackson (29:13.undefined) Yeah. Ian Binns (29:19.353) Yeah. Zack Jackson (29:20.644) And they did. The Jews and the Christians both built new systems that were more expensive, that didn't need to live in the temple. orb (29:25.457) Right. I've been asking people this, try this by the way. This is really fun. Say to somebody, cause I've been trying this out and I love what it does to people, me included. I'll say to them, hey, next year, check this out. Biden versus Trump. Here we go. Zack Jackson (29:46.41) You talk about feeling something in your body. orb (29:46.581) And notice, and people, you can just see people throw up in their mouth. And as like, are you kidding me? Those are the options next fall. And yet what's also interesting is you, if you zoom out just to touch, perhaps that as the options is the kind of pain the system needs to be in. But for like, maybe the system hasn't bottomed out yet. Like these are the options here in America where we, where we've Ian Binns (29:48.348) Mmm. orb (30:15.009) have a tradition of coming up with kind of awesome stuff. This is what perhaps a system hasn't, and obviously we know from addiction and lots of different things, you have to hit the wall at some level. And all of it, like think of how many, for the three of us, how many moments in your life you were in enough pain to actually start asking a whole new set of questions. But like try that Biden versus Trump, say it like it's the coolest thing ever and just watch people like, are you, Ian Binns (30:18.425) Yeah. Ian Binns (30:38.146) Yeah. orb (30:44.605) But like that disgust, that disgust is how we actually do new things. Like seriously? Ian Binns (30:53.072) Yeah. Zack Jackson (30:55.242) Yeah, sometimes you need to be searching for an enigmatic man with your assassin and have entrails dropped on top of your head. You know, sometimes that's just what happens. orb (31:11.165) Please clarify for your listeners that that's a reference to the book. Ian Binns (31:14.821) That scene was so amazing. Zack Jackson (31:15.434) Oh, that's one of those things that you can say about the book that makes no sense until you get to the part where it's in. orb (31:20.613) I just love the second time she appears in his bedroom and he's like, wait, you can't find Diltud? And then he says it again without the question, wait, you can't find Diltud? Like he's so delighted. Wait, has this happened before? Is this like a thing? And he's like the admiration for Diltud. She's like, yeah, he's just like, he doesn't even really exist. Wait, this is like the greatest news ever. Ian Binns (31:32.848) Hehehehe Ian Binns (31:36.527) Yeah. Zack Jackson (31:46.83) Aren't you supposed to be the best? orb (31:48.229) Yeah, wait, isn't this what you do? Ha ha ha! Zack Jackson (31:51.882) I also love that instead of saying like, well, you know, I'm an official assassin. You would never say that in a bureaucratic system, right? You would use a word like graining, which is so innocuous. It's just, it's so bureaucratic and he just keeps drilling that this is a graining. That's just, you're a murderer. It's what you are. No, no, I'm graining. It's different. It's well, are you. orb (32:02.207) Mmm. orb (32:06.944) This is a grainy. Ian Binns (32:11.001) Yeah. orb (32:14.085) Right. Do you have a gun? Do you have a gun on you right now? Do you have a gun? He's just like, you act like this is so civil, but like how... Ha ha ha. Ian Binns (32:18.552) Yes. Zack Jackson (32:19.598) I'm going to go ahead and turn it off. Zack Jackson (32:25.43) That was a theme that kept coming up as the book progressed. It was like, because earth was destroyed, we had to reform it. Some very smart people decided to create the most effective system possible for the most good for the most people. And from the surface, it looks great. Right. And everyone respects the chairs and the arrangements and all of that. And you can get a job just putting down stakes in the ground. orb (32:43.845) Alright, right. Zack Jackson (32:54.398) And imagining what a neighborhood might look like. That's a whole job. And if you don't like it, go be a baker. That's a job too. And it's just this freedom and wonderful. And you're like, why can't the world work like this? And then the more we look into it, those kinds of bureaucratic words that are used are actually laced with poison. And you realize how much is like. Respectable is not actually good. Ian Binns (32:59.068) Uh huh. Zack Jackson (33:21.974) Right. And I kept seeing, I kept hearing like, Oh, well, you know, we're, we're re we're restructuring the division right now where we're having to make some, uh, some strategic cuts to streamline our team is like, well, you're firing me, you know, and how many things that we can hide by, by making them sound respectable. orb (33:48.85) I was just reading about a hedge fund owner who owns an NFL team and is just making a mess of the NFL team. And the hedge fund owner made billions off of betting on the major banks to survive, but the banks survived because of a government bailout. You're like, that's insidious. Did I? Oh, Carolina in the house. Ian Binns (34:07.189) All right. I'm wondering who you're talking about. Ian Binns (34:16.016) Hmm orb (34:18.161) But like, if you just ponder that loop, if you just ponder that loop for a moment, and the insertion, giant systems that insert themselves in the exchange of goods and services and extract value out of it, adding nothing, exploiting it based on nanosecond computer insertions and trades, generating nothing, contributing nothing. Ian Binns (34:19.092) Maybe like 15 miles that way. orb (34:48.081) just sucking little pennies here and there, but doing it hundreds of billions of times. Like so insidious. Ian Binns (34:56.198) Yes. orb (34:58.369) insidious. Zack Jackson (35:00.086) Yeah, and we put them on magazine covers. They're brilliant. orb (35:03.813) And then, right, right. Contributing nothing. Ian Binns (35:09.36) I wanted to shift to something a little lighthearted. A theme that I loved in your book that I felt like just constantly kept coming up is curiosity amongst the characters. How, you know, when Heen was growing up, he was very, very curious. Would ask questions, you know, just really into it. When he then got into the role of being a series five after the tragedy struck for him. orb (35:22.172) Yeah. Ian Binns (35:39.708) Um, it, it's almost like his curiosity was kind of set aside some because he knew he had this job and you could, I love the fact that I guess in part three, you really get into this, that you can start figuring out. Uh, and I, I was kind of picking up on this pretty quickly that he felt fake until he, he got, yeah, like it. orb (36:02.41) Oh, yeah. Ian Binns (36:05.068) And then you can see the times, especially when he would get irritated with Dill Todd. Um, I love that. And I would put notes in here saying, you know, Oh, you know, you're it's great that he's irritated with Dill Todd simply because Dill Todd is being very curious. Um, and he's being pushed to kind of get back to that part of his childhood, almost of that role of curiosity. Um, which is, yeah, I'm always told by Zach and the others on the show and, and all of my friends and family. How orb (36:21.645) Yes! orb (36:27.609) Mm-hmm. Ian Binns (36:34.752) how curious of a person I am. Cause I just love to learn and love to ask questions and yeah, I love being curious. And so I just, I appreciate you did that throughout this book and showed his struggles with it as well. I thought that was really fascinating. orb (36:37.213) Yeah, scientists, absolutely, yeah. orb (36:48.689) Oh, thank you. That's so well said. Yeah, because you as science, the core of science, the engine of science is curiosity. Oh yeah, and I loved how he starts, like they're discussing things in the bakery and he'll like ask a question and be like, what the fuck, I don't participate in these conversations. I'm the guy just, he keeps, or like when there's a moment when, Zack Jackson (37:11.545) Hahaha. orb (37:18.361) Ziga May has Philippe died and he is like, yeah, no, I just saw him the other day, he's fine. And he's like, wait. As he's like beginning, and then Nune shows up and he's like, you're so fake. You just like connect with everybody but they don't know you're assassin. She's like, wait a second. I'm pretending. You think that you and I don't get a paycheck from the same man. Like she comes to just show him his own shadow like. Ian Binns (37:25.85) Yeah. Ian Binns (37:36.23) Yes. Ian Binns (37:46.106) Yeah. orb (37:46.149) What are you and these Firdes people now buddies or something? No, the two of us have a thing we're doing here. And he's like gradually he can't do the job and he can't pretend. And it's like. Ian Binns (37:59.076) I love when she starts telling him you're in so deep. You don't even see it. orb (38:02.817) You don't even see it. You can, you, oh my God, you're gonna like, and it's like a somehow like his curiosity is like, he's feeling and also when he first met Diltad, I was like, oh my God, how fascinating is this? He's beginning to realize that he's been numb for decades, most of his adult life. But then when he actually begins to feel the first feelings coming out, he's thawing, but the first feelings aren't, Ian Binns (38:05.925) Yeah. orb (38:31.961) a warm embrace of the unit of nature of all reality. It's just supernatural irritation. Like this guy who pretends like we somehow have some long standing relationship and he has these staccato bursts of conversation and he's wearing these multi one-colored outfit. Like, if you decide not to numb yourself and all these numbing devices we have at our disposal and actually. Zack Jackson (38:40.59) without right. Ian Binns (38:40.703) Hehehehe orb (39:00.605) pay attention and be present to what's coming up from within you. It's probably a number of unpleasant things are like ungreaved grief even. And yeah, you really want to feel okay. You want to feel alive. Okay. Here's a couple of things that are a part of feeling alive. Doubt anger rage. It's all part of it. And I just. Ian Binns (39:09.626) Yeah. Ian Binns (39:15.834) Yeah. Zack Jackson (39:18.307) Yeah. Ian Binns (39:18.416) When I, and again, you know, with Dill Tud, he played such an important role of reminding Heen who he is. That's kind of how I took it. Like reminding Heen of his own humanity, of who he used to be before he did this. Zack Jackson (39:27.47) Mm-hmm. orb (39:27.642) Yeah, right. orb (39:34.645) Right, right, right. And yet, he at first is like, is this guy onto me? Does he know? He just creates this horrible paranoia. Ian Binns (39:41.373) Especially when he goes, where'd you park your spaceship? And just, next thing you know, he's passed out. I thought that was great. orb (39:48.805) And then at the end when he's like, and then at the, because the whole thing is building up in some ways to that. And then at the end when he's like, yeah, I ask everybody that. I just, he's like, wait, what? Yeah, yeah, I like to do that. I just see how people respond. It's always fun. There's gotta be somebody who's got one. There has to be somebody. Ian Binns (39:58.8) Hahahaha Zack Jackson (40:00.104) hahahaha Ian Binns (40:09.924) That was good. Zack Jackson (40:10.182) Yeah, I don't think it's too much of a spoiler to say that his job for a good part of this is basically as, um, uh, a spy to the people in charge, eyes on the ground to notice the things that are happening so that they can be corrected along the way, which seems pretty innocuous, but you can't get, you can't get committed, you gotta connect spy leave. And that's his problem because he's, he's seeing, he's so good at seeing, but orb (40:21.445) Right, right. orb (40:26.461) Very straightforward. Yeah, yeah. Zack Jackson (40:39.082) He starts to know and that's when he gets into trouble, right? When it goes from his head down to his gut. There's a brilliant scene on a page three 35 for those who are following along at home, um, in which he has just baked a loaf of, was it rosemary olive oil bread? Um, so yeah, which was a special bread for his mother back on another planet that they've never had there. And he bakes it in the bakery. And this guy. orb (40:44.994) Absolutely. orb (40:57.649) Sourdough with rosemary. Ian Binns (40:57.924) which sounded very tasty. Zack Jackson (41:08.918) bursts in. Oh my gosh. Cause he rushes in and says, I have to have another. And then the narrator, which is he says, he's got a small white dog under his arm. The dog is wearing a sweater on the front of the sweater and big letters. It reads who's taking who for a walk. That's troubling enough, but there's a series of zippers on this man's shirt that run in diagonal lines across his chest and appear to have no purpose. Do you have any more? He sounds desperate. orb (41:09.718) Oh, I love it that you love this scene. Ian Binns (41:11.938) Yeah. Zack Jackson (41:38.514) I just stand there staring at the top of his head. He's losing his hair on top, but it's like, and it just keeps going back and forth in this way where there's this very clear thing happening in front of him. Where this bread that his mother made has touched this man deeply and the man wants more and all he can do is see that he's got too many zippers and his dog is wearing a t-shirt. orb (41:44.489) Yeah. orb (41:47.869) Yes. orb (41:59.877) And he's got hair combing out that's combed over. Yes. Zack Jackson (42:04.754) Like how many times have I been that like here I am looking at the facts of the situation Completely missing what's actually happening orb (42:13.846) And he's telling, or the mustaches, there's like the running theme of like must, I can't get over the mustache. So I just, he gets like hooked on something and yeah. Zack Jackson (42:17.418) Yeah. Zack Jackson (42:22.738) Mm-hmm. Yeah. Oh, I loved that. Ian Binns (42:28.028) I think one of my favorite scenes until we get to the very end where they find Dill Todd and really get, I mean, I loved how this book ended, but the scene in the school where Nune was really just hamming it up with the flower and the water. Oh my, I was laughing hysterically hearing you read that part of the book. I mean, it's just. orb (42:46.23) Oh Ian Binns (42:52.48) And especially someone who's been in a lot of schools since I prepare future teachers, just, I mean, I could totally imagine that whole scene and watching her hamm it up and do all these great things. I mean, it was so well done. I just, yeah, I fully admired that part of the book. orb (43:09.626) Oh, that makes me so happy because... And the fact that she's so opaque, obviously there's like, that's the giant Easter egg with her is you get nothing about her other than this astonishing. So she's the anti-heen. I'm realizing now as you said that, in some ways she's the anti-heen. You get no interior from her. So it's almost like it's very, very hard to feel anything about her other than just surface admiration for these. wide range like Liam Neeson I have a wide range of I have a particular set of skills but in the ravine you could see Heen is watching her like how the how do you know how to talk to like high school students in which she's like keep it completely dangerous the perfect line of danger without crossing she somehow is able to do all these things and leave them in the palm of her hand and shock without Ian Binns (43:45.048) Yes, love that movie, especially that scene. Zack Jackson (43:45.262) Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe Ian Binns (44:08.492) Mm-hmm. orb (44:10.669) And you could just heen, it's just like, what is? Just, he's just one other, it's like a different kind of Diltud irritation. How does she do, what am I even watching? What is, it's like just his curriculum of disorientation. This is like the master's level. It's like Diltud cracks the door and she comes in and just like, yeah, you're not gonna understand any of this. Zack Jackson (44:19.218) Mmm. Zack Jackson (44:33.89) But at the same time, she's like, she's totally just, that's all surface level. That's all playing. She's not being sincere. She's just, she's performing. Yeah. No matter what that looks like. If I have to be a performer, great. If I got to be this improv artist, great. I'm still going to kill you, but you'll know nothing of my heart and soul. And the moment you start to get too close, I'm going to shut you down, you know. Ian Binns (44:41.645) Mm-hmm. orb (44:42.193) Job to do. I always get the job done. Mm-hmm. orb (44:51.249) Yeah. orb (45:01.231) You know, of course, I think later today we're opening up a Where'd You Park Your Store in which there will be a t-shirt that just says in big letters, You messed with the wrong series 5. Ian Binns (45:12.744) Oh, I love that. Zack Jackson (45:13.499) Hahaha! orb (45:15.293) And there's also a t-shirt that says, Heen Who Grows Bears. And there's also, we're about to release, I think either sometime in a couple of days, we're about to release a coffee mug that just says, Piddle, Piddle on it. And there's, yeah. And then there's, oh, and then you'll be able to buy the Brown Ball poster for your wall. Ian Binns (45:20.876) Oh yes, that was great too. I just... Ha ha ha. Zack Jackson (45:24.078) I love that. Ian Binns (45:30.732) Oh my God. Yeah, when he stood up at the school and said that, that was amazing. orb (45:43.437) And then we designed, my friend designed one. And then there's also in that like, you've seen it with New York, but a t-shirt that just has a big heart. It just says, I love Diltud. Zack Jackson (45:44.183) Oh, I need that. orb (45:56.645) And then there's also a t-shirt that just says, you just got Bobby freelanced. Like the multiple deep cut level on that one. Zack Jackson (46:06.914) So I need, I need you to explain this to me. orb (46:09.861) You know, he's going to write a self-help book. You know that, right? Called, you just got to Bobby freelance. But he doesn't come from a family of writer. He doesn't come, he comes from the outer pangs. So right reading wasn't a thing. They weren't very civilized people. So he doesn't really know, but people could tell him he needs to write a book. So he dictates the book to Lan Xing, his girlfriend, but he keeps getting, cause he loves her so much. And it's like his manifesto, his like 12 rules for living kind of thing. But. Zack Jackson (46:12.562) Oh my gosh, how do we have? Ian Binns (46:14.021) Really? orb (46:38.621) He's telling it to her, but he keeps losing, like that he's dictating a book and talking to her. What do you think about that? So the book is the text of his book, but it's also him talking to her about, do you think I should say this next part? Zack Jackson (46:45.646) Hmm. Ian Binns (46:54.492) That's gonna be great. So don't be surprised if you see my name pop up in order requests with your new store coming out because yeah, that's, I could see myself getting some of those things. So. Zack Jackson (46:54.928) hahahaha orb (47:05.936) Uh, good. Oh, and then, you know, there's a Rolling Stones. There's the Rolling Stone, like Mick, Keith, Ronnie, Charlie, these, like, like the four names and, um, Keene, Borns, Nuneye, Diltud, like, you know, this, Zack Jackson (47:06.409) I just love. Ian Binns (47:12.988) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (47:13.356) Yeah. Ian Binns (47:18.748) Gosh Ian Binns (47:22.872) My wife will be like, what are all these shirts that are arriving? I'll just it's okay, honey. It's okay. It's it's my friend Rob's place. Yeah. orb (47:28.689) It's a pedal hoodie. Yeah. Zack Jackson (47:31.374) Of course, clearly, why doesn't everyone have that? Of course. Right? I just love that Bobby Freelance. I was reading all these names that are just totally nonsensical names that came out of your brain, and then suddenly Bobby Freelance. He's not a freelancer, just Bobby Freelance, just his name. orb (47:33.87) What kid doesn't have that? Yeah. Ian Binns (47:35.64) Yeah, yeah. That's so great. orb (47:43.117) Right. Yeah, good. orb (47:50.937) Yeah, and that's the beauty of creating a world is you, I realized the, oh, I guess part way through I was like, oh my God, we're gonna make up all these names, Ra-Bel, aren't we? Yes, every name will be made up. And then all of a sudden he gets on a glide and the guy's name is Wade. And then it goes back to all the names are made up. And then Bobby was like, oh, so there's the pattern and then the breaking of the pattern. But then when you do break the pattern, go full Applebee's. Zack Jackson (48:15.656) Hmm. orb (48:20.497) Go full America. So like when they're at the bowl and it's this incredibly exotic rest, but then, okay. Who are the two people who are arguing at the table next to them? No, don't make up. It's not Forbo and Rasheva. What's, oh yeah, Gretchen and Carl. Like, you know what I mean? Like what's the most, I went to high school with them. So when you go, if you're not gonna make it up, then go full irony free. Zack Jackson (48:41.123) Yeah. orb (48:50.309) America, you know what I mean? Ian Binns (48:52.057) Yeah. Zack Jackson (48:52.066) So it's like, what is that line from, oh, what's his name? My favorite poet, the angry farmer man. Wendell Berry, that quote from Wendell Berry, from the, that the moment that the politicos can start to read your mind, lose it, make more tracks than necessary, like the fox in the snow, like the moment that we think we know what's gonna happen next. orb (49:03.174) Wendell Berry. orb (49:13.681) Oh. orb (49:21.563) Yeah. Zack Jackson (49:21.686) Just you kick out the legs. Keep it, keep it unexpected. Ian Binns (49:22.906) Yeah. orb (49:24.237) Yeah. Mm-hmm. And that's what's interesting about, like I don't have any, like somebody mentioned me at the end of Act Two, and I was like, there's an Act Two? I don't know any of that. The protagonist, like I guess I know what a protagonist is, but I don't have any of that stuff in my head. So it's just, or like when he brings lines back and falls and breaks his jaw and bites off his tongue, I remember thinking, wait. Ian Binns (49:48.777) Mm. orb (49:53.245) I mean, it's like a Wednesday afternoon or something. Wait, my main character can't speak? Like, the narrator can't speak. How long is this gonna, like, not even, didn't see that, literally didn't see it coming. And then, so now I guess there's gonna be a period here where we're waiting for his tongue to get healed, where we'll just, oh, okay. Yeah, kick the legs out, see what we discover. Ian Binns (49:58.688) Yeah. Ian Binns (50:14.298) Yeah. Zack Jackson (50:22.794) Yeah. I mean, isn't that, isn't, I know very little about story writing, uh, other than you make a character you love and then you kick the crap out of them. orb (50:31.549) and then you fall. Yes, yes. Zack Jackson (50:35.294) Yeah. You see how they respond to everything falling apart. orb (50:42.877) So fun. Zack Jackson (50:42.91) I also need to say thank you for including, I yelled, I yelped in joy when I read this part that you included my favorite joke in the entire world in this book. And you made the point of the joke that it's a stupid joke, but that it is his favorite joke in the world because it's my favorite joke in the world. And it's the only joke I know. Ian Binns (50:43.14) It's just, you know, go ahead. orb (51:04.491) Pirate. Zack Jackson (51:06.066) Yeah. So a pirate walks into a bar and the bartender says, Hey, you know, you've got a steering wheel on your belt buckle. And he says, Arrr, it's been driving me nuts all day. The best joke in the world. I said that in church once. Yeah. Ian Binns (51:15.224) Yeah. orb (51:22.621) You can't, it's perfection. You can't, you can't, there's nothing to say. Nothing, what can be said of it? It's the ultimate joke. Zack Jackson (51:33.731) It's the best joke in the world. Ian Binns (51:35.688) So full disclosure, the first time I ever heard that joke was reading it in your book. I had actually never heard that joke. No, yeah. orb (51:40.809) Oh, beautiful. You're welcome. Zack Jackson (51:41.026) Have I never said that joke to you, Ian? That's the only joke I know. I legitimately is the only joke I know. orb (51:46.493) Hmm. The book is bringing the two of you together in new ways. How is it we've been friends this long and I haven't heard your one joke? Ian Binns (51:50.776) in ways we never knew. Zack Jackson (51:52.637) Oh Right? We're always talking about serious stuff. That's the problem. Or Star Wars, sure. Right. Very serious. Yeah. Pretty much. Ian Binns (51:59.undefined) Or Star Wars. orb (52:01.982) Yeah, serious stuff. Yeah. Same category. Ian Binns (52:03.544) Yeah, yeah, very important. Exactly. I just got my Star Wars Advent Calendar opened it up today for the first time. Very excited. My Lego Advent Calendar. It's a major joy this time of year. So. orb (52:11.667) Oh, that is so great. orb (52:18.124) Thank you. Zack Jackson (52:22.45) Yeah. Ian Binns (52:23.58) So what's next for you, Rob, with this series and stuff? You talk, I think you said before, you hope it's gonna be multiple books and you've left it that way. Where do you want to go with the next one? orb (52:34.829) Yeah, well, God, I just, I'm always like, don't say anything, Rob Bell. Just, but obviously it says book one. Like I have a long standing, well, like on the Robcast, I just early on was like, don't be that guy who's talking about what you're making. First off, cause it might be rubbish, whatever you're making, but just tell people, yeah, it's out. Ian Binns (52:58.148) Right. orb (53:04.909) So just be somebody who actually makes things. Early on, that was a thing where it was like, otherwise, you're just that, you know, hey guys, working on chapter seven, and everybody's, but, and then I go and put book one on the cover, which is basically like, there's more. So yeah, there, it's very, very exciting and fun. So yes, there's, I, there's different places we're going to go. And, and like the Bobby, when I realized. Like, What's a Knuckum, one of my plays, is the play that Nord writes early on in this book. And I was like, God, it's so on the nose and ridiculous. But when I realized there was ancillary books, Bobby Freelance is gonna need to write. And then there's some other things that you're gonna need, you're gonna need, that aren't like the book one, book two, book three, but there's these other pieces. So, yes. And yeah, quite, yeah. So, uh. That'll all be coming. And I get very, very excited about where it's headed. Even the idea that it would go forward in time, it may surprise you where different ones. Yeah. Yeah, and I. Ian Binns (54:14.212) Yeah, I mean, I'm excited about where it could go. Zack Jackson (54:14.27) Yeah, but this isn't your first. This isn't your first work of fiction though. I mean, you've written the two plays and this isn't even your first novel. You have. orb (54:24.177) Yeah, there was a one novel years ago and it felt, that first novel in the plays felt, I see at the time how it felt indulgent. Like I had to learn to trust the goodness of life, even as I was going around the world, inviting people to trust the goodness of life and making fun of terms like guilty pleasure and giving people permissions, you know, just give yourself permission slip, follow your heart, all that stuff. This is like Rob Bell'd me. You know what I mean? It's like all these things that I spouted off about standing on stages, holding microphones all over the place, came like boomeranged back and punched me in the face with love. And was like, this thing that you've been like almost doing like on the side, almost like kind of a, because you know responsibly you have this thing that you do. Just. Zack Jackson (54:59.451) Yeah, you're the permission giver who gives you permission. orb (55:25.949) Just let yourself throw yourself into it and see what happens. So it's been a very, see where it goes and just trust it. And then, yeah, just, yeah. Yeah. And all the stuff everybody like, God, how do you pay the bills? How do you arrange your life around that? How do you, all the questions all of us have just, are all the questions that came up all over again. So yeah, that's got like a. Ian Binns (55:30.33) Yeah. Zack Jackson (55:53.822) Yeah, yeah, sometimes. orb (55:55.773) We're literally in the corner of the garage figuring out a new life. Ian Binns (56:01.744) Yeah. Zack Jackson (56:02.326) which I gotta say is very, it's very reassuring for the rest of us that you're doing the same thing, that you are. orb (56:12.954) stuff doesn't go away. Zack Jackson (56:14.686) Yeah, letting a lot of things go, living more simply so that you can follow where, where you're being pulled. orb (56:21.401) Yeah, yeah, that's all the like, all those wobbles. But how are we gonna... And even the... Well, you all, you all know the science. Heisenberg's on... Like, we don't know what the particles are gonna do next. Like the causality of the modern age, like A plus B equals C, we don't get... Maybe. Ian Binns (56:39.374) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (56:43.387) Yeah. Zack Jackson (56:48.886) be the uncertainty you want to see in the world. orb (56:49.789) There's also, right, obedience. There's also, yeah, you throw yourself into it and follow it and then we'll see where it goes. But yes, Ian, in answer to your question, and this has been talking about this has been really interesting energetically because I knew don't give this book coming out and talking to people about this book, let the conversations, just let all that shape the heart because of the... next books two and three and four and maybe five, which have lots of shape. But let, but even, even the, no, don't hold off for just a half second and just talk to people about this and, and see how that shapes even where they go. Brian, Brian Eno has this great line about, he doesn't read fan mail. Ian Binns (57:37.925) Yeah. Zack Jackson (57:41.9) Yeah. orb (57:47.965) because he says people who admire your work are always voices for conservatism because they're like that thing, I love that thing you did. So he's like, I don't wanna hear people tell me how much they like the thing I did because it inherently will put in my head, keep doing that thing you did. But what's so fascinating to me about talking about this book is how many people are like, I can't wait for book two because I have absolutely no idea. And that makes me very happy. Ian Binns (58:14.608) That's right. I have all these conflicting thoughts in my head on where this thing's gonna go and how the characters are gonna interact. But I'm in, it's so exciting. I think that part, you've captured my curiosity. And so I... orb (58:20.515) Right, so. orb (58:25.681) Alright. Yeah. orb (58:30.757) And there's like a giant, giant Easter egg about what happens next. And it's so obvious at the end of the book, but not one person has mentioned it. And not one person has asked for it or thinks that would be interesting. But I have like a, oh no. So I already have like the sophomore album, maybe jazz. And it's people will be like, what? And then, oh. Ian Binns (59:00.141) Yeah. orb (59:00.733) So I already feel the giant, all I have to get, you have to get all that off your head about even what's, then just start over again, because nobody. Ian Binns (59:09.08) See, I wouldn't even want to try to guess what it is because I want that experience you just simulated it up. Like, oh, okay. Like, I didn't see that coming or something like that. Like, I just, I'm, cause you did that a lot throughout this book, so. orb (59:18.853) Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. orb (59:24.773) Yeah, and nobody was asking for this book. Nobody was like, God, when are you going to get around to that thing? So all of it is just enacting everything I've been spouting out about for years. It's like, OK, let's just do this. Yeah. Zack Jackson (59:27.534) Hmm. Ha ha. Zack Jackson (59:40.406) Yeah, I'm anticipating being completely surprised by whatever's next. And then for the format to drastically shift after that. And for book three to just be written in semaphore or something. It's a series of flag movements since book three and who knows? Ian Binns (59:44.823) Mm-hmm. orb (59:54.373) Yeah, Sanskrit. orb (01:00:03.037) So great. Zack Jackson (01:00:05.446) Yeah, well, thank you for sharing your delight with us. You are always a source of inspiration for so many people, the official permission giver. Thank you for accepting that permission for yourself and producing that which makes you come alive. Ian Binns (01:00:07.836) Absolutely. orb (01:00:15.187) Mmm. orb (01:00:19.561) Thank you. Mmm. orb (01:00:29.417) Thank you. That means the world. And thanks for having me on your podcast. Zack Jackson (01:00:32.074) Yeah, everyone should get the book. You should sign up for the two days at Ojai. There's all that and more available at rodbell.com, where there's also links to all of your social media connections, which just like everything else you do, is subversive and delightful and not at all what the professionals would tell you to do. orb (01:01:00.285) There are professionals? Question mark? Zack Jackson (01:01:03.104) I mean, there are people that get paid. Ian Binns (01:01:05.146) Yeah. orb (01:01:05.529) Okay, there we go. Whoa, that's a great distinction. Well said, well done. Zack Jackson (01:01:10.254) Yeah. All right. Ian Binns (01:01:12.188) Okay, well thank you for joining us, Rob. Yeah. orb (01:01:12.281) Love it. Wonderful talking to you all. Thank you. Very inspiring. 

Episode 121 Today we are joined by Dr. Chris Impey to talk about exoplanets, the search for life in space, and the search for meaning on Earth.   Dr Impey is a University Distinguished Professor of Astronomy at the University of Arizona. He has over 220 refereed publications on observational cosmology, galaxies, and quasars, and his research has been supported by $20 million in NASA and NSF grants. He has won eleven teaching awards and has taught two online classes with over 300,000 enrolled and 4 million minutes of video lectures watched. He is a past Vice President of the American Astronomical Society, won its Education Prize, has been an NSF Distinguished Teaching Scholar, Carnegie Council’s Arizona Professor of the Year, and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Professor. He has written 70 popular articles on cosmology, astrobiology and education, two textbooks, a novel called Shadow World, and eight popular science books: The Living Cosmos, How It Ends, Talking About Life, How It Began, Dreams of Other Worlds, Humble Before the Void, Beyond: The Future of Space Travel, and Einstein’s Monsters: The Life and Times of Black Holes.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    9bi2pvCS8hJHF73c6ylI Transcript (AI Generated) ian (01:16.703) Our guest today is a university distinguished professor of astronomy at the University of Arizona. He has over 220 refereed publications on observational cosmology, galaxies, and quasars, and his research has been supported by $20 million in NASA and NSF grants. He's won 11 teaching awards and has taught two online classes with over 300,000 enrolled and 4 million minutes of video lectures watched. He's a past vice president of the American Astronomical Society, has been an NSF Distinguished Teaching Scholar, Carnegie Council's Arizona Professor of the Year, and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute professor. He has written 70 popular articles on cosmology, astrobiology, and education, two textbooks, a novel called Shadow World and eight popular science books. I'm very excited to welcome Dr. Chris Impey to the podcast today. chris_impey (02:07.898) Yeah, delighted to be with you. zack_jackson (02:09.75) Welcome. That's quite an introduction. Ha ha ha. Thanks for watching. I hope you enjoyed this video. I'll see you in the next one. Bye. ian (02:12.983) Yeah. Obviously, I shortened down what you sent us, and it was tough for me to do that, Chris, because you've done a lot. You know, obviously, I was at fellow academic. I understand the need to do peer-reviewed research and those types of things in our field, but I was really impressed with how much writing you've done for the general public, both articles and also your books. You've written a novel. You've been on several podcasts. Can you kind of tell us a little bit about your background, what is you do, and then how you also got into that part of your profession of making sure you communicate with the general public as well? chris_impey (02:53.298) Sure, you won't hear it in my voice, my accent, but I was born into Edinburgh, I'm a Scott. I had a little transatlantic childhood that sort of wiped out the Scottish borough, but if you feed me single malt whiskey it would come back. And of course, I'm sure you noticed if you've gone to Britain that you look up and there are not many stars visible there. So once I decided to do astronomy I knew I was going to leave, so I did my undergrad work in London. zack_jackson (03:04.15) Thank you. Bye. Ha ha ha! chris_impey (03:22.938) and never look back and I'm a dual citizen now. So astronomy is big in Arizona. I've not looked elsewhere. The grass is never greener anywhere else. We're building the biggest telescopes in the world and we have five observatories within an hour's drive. So this is the perfect place to do observational astronomy. So I'm very happy. But then as people's careers evolve, you know, the writing research papers is important. It's the sort of stocking trade of the academic. But it's also, you know, the texture of the average research article is that of a three-day old bologna sandwich. It's almost designed to be indigestible writing. The constraints of an academic discourse make that happen. So I was always interested in more popular writing, so I segued into textbooks. And then I realized the problem with them is that you've written a textbook and that's a nice challenge. But then the publisher just wants you to update it every year or so. It's like, okay, that's not so exciting. I think I'm not going to do this anymore. And then I think more broadly, apart from just liking education and being very committed to teaching and mentoring students, you know, I've just seen the, well, even before the sort of large waves of misinformation and the assault on facts in our culture, it's, I viewed it as an obligation of a professional scientist to communicate to a larger audience because, well, to be blunt, we're paid by the taxpayer. zack_jackson (04:26.05) Thank you. Bye. zack_jackson (04:44.15) Hmm. chris_impey (04:54.118) And also, there's a lot of misinformation out there, and science is often misperceived or characterized in wrong and inappropriate ways. And so I think all scientists should not just stay in their little lane doing research, but they should, if they can, some better than others. And not everyone can be Neil deGrasse Tyson. That's fine. But I think there's an obligation to communicate to larger audiences. And once I got into it and got practiced and better at it, then I now understand that I mean, it's like I couldn't imagine not doing it. chris_impey (05:32.018) And the books just, okay. And so books just flow out of that because writing popular articles is just a sort of lighter version of writing a technical article. And then, you know, you want a meaty subject. You do a book-length version. So I've been writing about cosmology and astrobiology. And I've started about 10 years ago I say, I think this is my ninth book, Exoplanets. So books are fun. They're more challenging. ian (05:32.543) I almost had to sneeze. Sorry, go ahead. Ha ha ha. chris_impey (06:01.958) to take on a big subject and distill it down and make it, you gotta make it, have a resonance for a person with no, maybe with no background in astronomy or maybe just a little background and you're taking them through what could be a very esoteric subject. So that, I like the challenge of that. Although the books are exhausting. Once I've done a book, I don't wanna, I almost don't wanna look at a book or read a book or write a book for a while. zack_jackson (06:28.65) do people ask you like when's the next one coming out? Like right after you finish. It's like having a baby. I'm not sure if you can tell, but I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. chris_impey (06:31.898) Of course. Yeah, they are. Yeah, it's like I'm not going to go there about the having a baby because my wife would my wife would give me a hard time. There's nothing like having a baby. You can't even imagine, you know, and and and she and yeah, and she's right. But like having a baby, you know, women may feel that and then they do it again, you know, so I write the book, have have a slight, you know, trauma afterwards or just let down. It's a little bit of a let down sometimes. zack_jackson (06:43.89) That is a good man. Good job. ian (06:45.766) Yes. chris_impey (07:01.918) you finished any big-ish thing. But I do like writing, so I'm committed to it. zack_jackson (07:02.094) Hmm. ian (07:09.303) Yeah. zack_jackson (07:10.05) So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot about exoplanets these days. So you're writing and thinking and studying a lot chris_impey (07:15.718) Yeah, it's a super hot field with the number has up to 5,300 last time I checked on NASA's website. And remember, you know, 1995, the number was zero. So this is all, this is all the last few decades and it's just growing gangbusters. And now it's a slightly unfortunate because I have, we have students here who are working on exoplanets or astrobiology. And, you know, there was a time when if you discovered one cool Earth-like planet or water world, ian (07:27.244) I remember that. chris_impey (07:45.818) about it. Well now you know you'd have to find a hundred interesting things to write a paper. So the bar has been raised just by the success of the field. But the interesting thing is that it's moving to a new phase. So the most of what's known about those 5300 exoplanets is not much at all. They're basically is either a mass or a size or maybe both and you get a density and know it's a gas planet or a rocky planet. And that's it. We can't characterize zack_jackson (07:46.792) Hmm. zack_jackson (07:54.15) Yeah. zack_jackson (08:04.316) Hmm. chris_impey (08:15.698) thousands of exoplanets. So the next stage of the game, everyone's taking a deep breath in the research field is to try and characterize the atmospheres and the geology and of course find life. And that's just a very hard experiment. It's just much harder than detecting an exoplanet in the first place. So there's sort of excitement in the air because if I were betting, I would say that within five to seven years, we will have done the experiment of looking for life or Earth planets that are nearest to us and will either know the answer. Either there will be microbes on those planets that have altered their atmospheres or there won't be and that will be an amazing experiment to have done. So it's really on the horizon. But it's daunting because it's a very difficult experiment. Earth-like planets are a billion times fainter than the stars they orbit. So you have to, and they're far away so they appear very close to their star. So you have to isolate the planet from the star, blot out the billion times brighter and then smear the feeble reflected light from the exoplanet into a spectrum and look for molecules that indicate life like oxygen, ozone, methane, water vapor and so on. ian (09:26.503) But the molecules you're looking for are always in the atmosphere itself, right? Like you wouldn't, and I understand that, and I think we all do, but, you know, some people listening may not realize that that's, that's what you're looking at. When you're talking about with the spectrum is that makeup of the atmosphere, nothing about like if there's, if it's a rocky planet, what's on the ground, I guess. zack_jackson (09:26.614) Now. chris_impey (09:30.458) there. chris_impey (09:45.358) Right, right. And it's important for people to realize that the characterizing the exoplanets is done in that indirect way. For instance, of those 5,300, only 150 have ever had an image made of them. You know, seeing is believing. It's nice to have images of exoplanets. That's a hard thing. And those images are, you know, they're pathetic, a few pixels. They're just pale blue dots in a far away. So there's no, and if you ask this, ian (10:02.488) Right. zack_jackson (10:03.35) Thank you. Thank you. chris_impey (10:15.678) The question of when will we be able to make an image of an exoplanet to be able to see continents and oceans? The answer is maybe never. The answer is decades or a very long time because it's just too hard to make images that sharp of things that far away, even with space telescopes. So astronomers have to be a little more indirect and the clever method that's on the table now and will be done, James Webb is doing some of this but was never built to do this experiment, it will actually be better done with the huge... set of ground-based telescopes under construction. So the experiment is you use the star to backlight the exoplanet when it crosses in front of it, and the backlit, the light from the star filters through the atmosphere of the exoplanet and imprints absorption from these relevant molecules called biosignatures. So that's the experiment you're doing. And it's still hard. And it's also not clear you'll get an unambiguous answer. You know, obviously, and its cousin ozone are the prime biomarkers because on Earth, the oxygen we breathe, one part and five of our air, was put there by microbes billions of years ago. So the reverse logic is if you see oxygen on an exoplanet or in the atmosphere of an exoplanet, it must have been put there by life because oxygen is so reactive, so volatile that it disappears. If there's not life to sustain it, say the biosphere of the Earth shut down overnight, the entire biosphere just shut down. ian (11:41.803) Thank you. Thank you. chris_impey (11:45.458) just imagine the thought experiment. Within five to seven billion, a million years, so very short time in geological terms, the oxygen, that one part in five we breathe, would be gone. It would rust things, it would dissolve in seawater, it would oxidize with rocks, and it would be gone. So if it were not put there originally by life and then sustained by photosynthesis and other life processes, it would disappear. So the logic, therefore, is if you see it elsewhere, bang, it's got to be microbes putting it there and causing it to be there. ian (12:16.845) Yeah. zack_jackson (12:16.95) Hmm, unless there's some hitherto unknown non-living process by which these things happen. chris_impey (12:24.058) Right. So that's a good point. And there is a debate there because the data that's going to come in, well, first of all, it'll be noisy. It won't be beautiful, perfect spectra. So they'll be ambiguous to interpret. And then when you see it, what is the, where's, does the bar set for being enough? And the geologists have weighed in on this. And so whereas the sort of simplistic view as well, if you see any significant level of oxygen, certainly 18% like on the earth, what's got to be biology. zack_jackson (12:41.694) Yeah. chris_impey (12:54.218) That's pretty much true, but geologists have figured out ways where without biology, just with geochemical reactions, if you conjure up a geochemistry, you can get 6%, 5%, 7% oxygen. That's quite a lot, more than most people would have expected. So the geologists are saying, well, hold on. Yes, a lot of oxygen is probably a biomarker, but you would have to know more about the planet to be sure that it didn't have some weird chemistry and geology going on. for any of the other biomarkers. Methane is a biomarker too because it's produced on earth, you know, mostly by life, a good fraction of that, cow farts I think. But so it's the same argument. So these wonderful and difficult to obtain spectra are going to be, everyone's going to jump all over them and hope they give an unambiguous answer, but they might not. Science is not always as cut and dried as that at the frontier, which is where we are. But it's the zack_jackson (13:34.511) Hmm. Sure. chris_impey (13:53.958) exciting experiment and it will be done fairly soon. ian (13:58.804) Okay. chris_impey (14:01.358) And then a sort of related issue is that it's not just microbes. I mean, that's just looking for life as we know it on the earth. You could also look with the same technique, and this is an interesting possibility, for what are called techno signatures. So biosignatures is just evidence of life, typically microbes, because we think most life in the universe is going to be microbial, even if it's not exactly like our form of biology. But you could also look for things technology like chlorofluorocarbons, which you know, were responsible for almost killing the ozone layer for a few decades until we sort of ruled them out of refrigeration units. And there are other chemicals that are produced by industrial activity in a civilization, which would normally be very trace ingredients in an atmosphere, barely, you know, not present at all really. And if you could detect them in an atmosphere, it would be indirect evidence of a technological or industrial civilization. Realization on that planet and that will be very exciting. So that's the same method being used to ask a very different question But it's a more challenging experiment because these are trace ingredients. I'll give you an example I mean, we're all aware of climate change global warming and we've seen the carbon dioxide content of our atmosphere Increased by 30% roughly in the last few decades. That's quite a lot. It's obviously concerning and we know the implications But if you step back and look at the earth from afar and say, well, shouldn't that just be obvious? Shouldn't some other alien civilization look at the Earth and say, oh, those people are really screwing up. They're killing their atmosphere with climate change and fossil fuel burning? The answer is probably not because carbon dioxide is a trace ingredient of our atmosphere, and 30% increase on a trace ingredient would actually be very hard to detect from a distance. So even that dramatic thing that we are all anxious about on our planet industrial activity and fossil fuels is not dramatically obvious from a distance. So these are quite difficult experiments. The techno-signature experiment is much harder than the biosignature experiment. zack_jackson (16:13.592) Hmm. ian (16:14.165) Interesting. rachael (16:17.101) One of the things that you had said when looking at these exoplanets was, you know, we look at them and we want to see them and what's going on with them. And then you added the line, and of course, detect life. And that's where our conversation has gone for the last couple of minutes. But I'm wondering, you added that phrase that seems to think that finding life is part, entire reason for studying exoplanets. And I'm wondering, A, why you think that? And B, what that says about, you know, making it very narcissistic and Earth-centered, what that says about us. chris_impey (16:54.799) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (17:02.778) Right. Okay. So good question. I can unpack that in parts. I mean, yes, if I were a geologist or a planetary scientist, I'd be just pleased as punch and happy as a pig in a poke to just study exoplanets. That's all that I'm happy. I've got 5300 new, new geological worlds to study. Whereas the solar system only has a handful. Oh, yeah. So depending on your discipline, you might be totally zack_jackson (17:16.049) Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe rachael (17:19.507) Right! chris_impey (17:32.718) properties. But astrobiology, I mean astrobiology writ large is the study of life in the universe, and the context for that search for life in the universe is the fact that we only know of one example of life, and that's on this planet. And everything in astronomy and the history of astronomy, and the Copernicus onwards, has told us we're not special, has told us there's nothing singular zack_jackson (17:59.891) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (18:02.718) about our solar system, about our galaxy, or our position in the galaxy, and so on. In space and time, we are not special. And so, you know, for biology to be unique to this planet, when the ingredients are widespread, we've detected carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, the biogenic elements out to distances of 12, 13 billion light years, almost to the birth of the universe. Water is one of the, you might think it's special. Earth is a water world. Well, actually, some of the exoplanets have 10 to 30 times more water. water than the Earth. So it's not, the Earth isn't really a water world even, pale blue dot, it's not that special. And water is one of the most abundant molecules in the universe too. So all the ingredients, the table is set for life in the universe. And as the universe is evolved and is quite old, more and more of those biogenic elements are made by stars and spat out into space to become part of new star systems and planets. And so in an old mature universe with a lot of heavy elements, and with many habitable locations now, we the best guess is 20 billion Earth-like habitable worlds just in our galaxy, then it just, whether or not it's central to astrobiology, it absolutely begs the question, is biology unique to this planet? Because it really shouldn't be statistically. However, logically, you know, to be correct and scientific, it's possible that there were a unique set of accidents and flukes that led to life on Earth, and it is unique. It would still chris_impey (19:33.038) It's historical science to wonder how life on earth developed and nobody's ever built a cell from scratch in the lab people have done various parts of that experiment and They can't connect all the dots, but they've done some very interesting experiments that certainly suggest It's not a fluke that the whole thing happened. You need time. You need the possibilities of Chemicals bumping into each other and getting more complex, but that tends to happen It happens if you do it in a computer it in a lab as well as you can. And so the context of the ingredients for life being so widespread and there not seeming to be any sort of bizarre, flukish occurrence in the development of at least replicating molecules that could store information, if not a full cell, would certainly lead you to anticipate life elsewhere. And then game on, because the big question then is, so there are two almost binary questions you're trying to answer, which is why the field is so exciting. Is there life beyond Earth, yes or no? And then if yes, is it like our life? Is it biology? Because everything on Earth, from a fungal spore to a butterfly to a blue whale, is the same biological experiment. They seem like very diverse things, but that's one genetic code. experiment that led to that diversity after a long time, after four billion years of evolution. And there's no reason to expect, even if the ingredients for life and the basis for biology exist far beyond Earth and in many locations, there's no real reason to expect that it would play out the same way elsewhere. And so that second question, is it like Earth life, is a very big question. rachael (21:27.201) Just as a curiosity, when did, if you know, when did microbes appear on Earth? chris_impey (21:39.158) So the earliest, the indications of life on Earth, the history of that is really tricky, because as you know, the Earth is a restless planet, and we weren't there, it's historical science, and it's possible you may never answer the question, but the big problem is the restless Earth. It's very hard, there's only a handful of places on Earth, Western Australia, Greenland, somewhere in South Africa, where you can find four billion year old rocks. They just don't exist. I mean, everything's been churned by geology and eroded rachael (21:46.661) We weren't there. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. rachael (21:56.104) Right. chris_impey (22:09.338) Weathered and so on so just even and that's about when we think life started So you're dealing with you know a crime scene where the evidence has been trampled many times and the crowds have just Obliterated the evidence so that's a hard thing and then the second hard thing is that the incipient Traces of life as you get to cells are very indirect They're sort of just you they're biochemical tracers or sorry there. They're chemical imbalances isotopic imbalances of versus normal carbon and so on. Because you're not looking for fully fossilized cells. So if you're just looking at what would be called chemical tracers of life, they're pretty good, but argumentative, this field is not resolved, traces that go back about 3.8 billion years. If you're asking when do you have the first fossil life forms, fossilized microbes, single cells, rachael (23:00.421) Okay. chris_impey (23:09.238) to 3.4, 3.5 billion years, and that's people then stop arguing about it. I think they believe that evidence. And then there's this enormous long time between that and multi-celled organisms. That step in the evolution of life seems to have taken a long time. You could infer that that means it's difficult or doesn't happen very often, but that's a dangerous inference from data of one. All the inferences, hazardous. So astrobiologists have to keep pinching themselves and saying, it's a sample of one. It's a sample of one. rachael (23:30.921) Thank you. Thank you. zack_jackson (23:32.75) Thank you. Bye. rachael (23:39.721) One does not make a line. One day to... That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. chris_impey (23:41.139) Don't draw too many conclusions. So, yeah, the cell formation, the evolution of the first cells and microbes seem to have taken 300 or 400 million years from the first chemical traces of life. But those chemical traces, we don't know. There's that Zircon that was found in Western Australia, 4.404 billion years accurately measured by radioactive dating. chris_impey (24:09.378) environment and so there's evidence really soon after the earth formed when it was just a hellhole of a place you know impacts and craters and geological activity that the earth surface was almost tacky like magma and yet there were there were any ingredients for life there so nobody would rule out life going back very close to the formation of the earth but then but tracing all these evolutionary paths is really hard I mean we have stromatolites which are modern descendants of the first microbial colonies. You can go to Western Australia, Shark's Bay, I've been there and it's great, they're stromatolites. These were just the same as they were now three billion years ago, it's really cool. One of the things you can't see behind me is my stromatolite collection. rachael (24:53.985) Yeah. rachael (24:59.962) One of the reasons, yeah, that's fascinating. It makes a collector about that. It makes a collector. Um. Yeah. zack_jackson (25:00.071) kind of a few collections chris_impey (25:01.578) Yeah. Oh, well, three. Does that make a collection? ian (25:05.749) It's good enough. chris_impey (25:07.958) Well, yes. It's like primitive counting systems, one, two, many. So I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. I have many. rachael (25:13.941) That's right. zack_jackson (25:15.016) Ha! rachael (25:19.021) One of the reasons I was asking that question about Earth, because you were talking about these very far away planets and looking for microbial, likely microbial life, then showing up in the atmosphere by its various products. And so my question was stemming from how far back are these planets that we're looking at? a really long time to create its microbes, then perhaps, since we're looking so far back in time, that maybe those microbes exist now, but when we're looking at them, they didn't exist. Right, that lovely time, space question. chris_impey (25:51.579) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (26:02.098) Right. So in that context, it's important to say that the exoplanets we're finding are in our backyard. So Kepler, NASA's Kepler mission is really responsible for almost half the exoplanets, even though it stopped operating a few years ago. And so the most exoplanets we know of are within 100 to 1,000 light years. And that's our backyard. The Milky Way is 100,000 light years across. rachael (26:12.785) Okay. rachael (26:28.064) Oh, close. Yeah. chris_impey (26:32.398) And of course, logically, therefore, we're only seeing them as they were a century or millennium ago, which is no time geologically. So we can't see that far back. So we're not really looking at ancient history. However, the more important point, having mentioned that carbon nitrogen, oxygen, and water have been around in the universe for a long time, is that we now can very confidently say, even if we can't locate such objects, that an earth clone, rachael (26:32.606) Okay. rachael (26:38.901) Yeah, it's no time at all. Yeah. chris_impey (27:02.098) something as close to Earth as you could imagine, could have been created within a billion years of the Big Bang. And that's seven billion years before the Earth formed. So there are potential biological experiments out there that have a seven billion year head start on us and then add the four billion four and a half billion years of evolution. And that's boggling because you know, we can't imagine what evolution and biology might come up with given 10 or 12 billion years to evolve rather zack_jackson (27:11.75) Hmm. chris_impey (27:31.958) Maybe it makes no difference at all. Maybe these things are slow and they're hard and the Earth was actually one of the fastest kids on the block rather than one of the slowest kids on the block. We don't know. Sample of one again. We'll just put that as a big asterisk over almost everything I say so I don't have to keep saying sample of one. Okay. zack_jackson (27:32.014) Hmm. rachael (27:41.861) Simple of one. zack_jackson (27:42.808) Yeah. zack_jackson (27:48.834) No. rachael (27:49.221) That'll just be today's episode title, right? Today's sample of one. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. chris_impey (27:51.14) Yeah, right. zack_jackson (27:52.65) That's Apple F1. chris_impey (27:55.038) Yeah, induction is a bitch when you can't do it. zack_jackson (27:55.492) So. zack_jackson (28:02.51) So we've talked a lot about the how it's possible, how we might detect it, but what do you think it might do to our sense of self and our sense of spirituality, our sense of humanity, our sense of earth? Should we start discovering life outside of, or at least biological markers in other places? chris_impey (28:28.898) Right. I mean, I think it sort of bifurcates if we find microbial life elsewhere and improve it, you know, it's beyond a reasonable doubt. And even if we don't know if it's our biology or not, it's just a biomarker that's irrefutable or set of biomarkers. That will be a transformative, epochal event in the history of science. It'll be dramatic. But it will make front page headlines and then fade, I would say, fairly rapidly, because it's microbes. zack_jackson (28:44.618) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (28:58.858) Like, that's Ponskum or stuff on your shower curtain, like, okay, who cares? So, I mean being facetious, but not too facetious, because I think the public will just be interested and science interested people will be very interested, and books will be written, and documentaries will be made, and so on. But in the public consciousness, I don't think it will permeate very far or persist very long. Of course, the counterpoint of if we decide we found intelligent life in the universe through those techno markers. zack_jackson (29:03.391) Ha ha ha. chris_impey (29:28.978) you know, the search for artificial radio or optical signals from some civilization. So they're obviously artificial and they couldn't have been produced by nature. That will be more profound, of course, because that's companionship in the universe. And that will raise all sorts of questions. So I think it really divides that way. And since the universe logically, if life exists in the universe elsewhere, there'll be many more microbes than intelligent civilizations. You know. ian (29:29.523) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (29:58.858) seed in that first mode. Although SETI is a side bet. I mean SETI for 65 years has been placing this little side bet. Okay, yeah, we can look for microbes and those are hard experiments and now we can almost do it. But let's always place this side bet of jumping over the evolutionary path from microbes to men or humans and look for those intelligent technological civilizations directly. And so it's worth doing. I'm not science scientists are divided on SETI, even astronomers are divided on it, whether it's a worthwhile pursuit or not, whether it's even scientific or not. That's the strongest critique of SETI is that unlike, you know, if I wanted to go to the National Science Foundation and get a million dollar grant to study some issue of, you know, solid state physics or high energy physics, I'd have to propose an experiment and define my parameters and how I was going to control variables and say how I would interpret the data. could refute or confirm. SETI doesn't have that kind of situation. They don't know how to define success or failure even. Well, they can define success more or less, but they can't define failure and they can't say what the probability of success is. So it's not a normal scientific pursuit. So that's the critique of SETI from scientists, but I still think it's worth doing. ian (31:04.946) Right. ian (31:23.628) Yeah. rachael (31:24.842) You talked about, and I think you're probably right in terms of how much people will care in the long run or in their day-to-day life or, right? Okay, so we found some microbes from, you know, a thousand light years away. I don't, that didn't reduce my student loan at all. But like, didn't, thank you. It's nice, saw the headlines. It's now three years later. chris_impey (31:45.018) Right. rachael (31:54.441) But I've noticed that you did a lot of work with the Vatican and with monks, and I think that that's a different population that might respond to and other religious figures, but specifically those I'm asking you because those are the groups that you've worked with. They might respond a little bit differently to this existence. Could you speak a little bit ian (32:01.35) Yeah chris_impey (32:16.803) Right. rachael (32:23.726) in this idea of how it would change. chris_impey (32:25.658) Sure. And maybe preface it with just the cultural comment, with independent religion, that the other issue that will arise with, I mean, if microbial life is found elsewhere and astrobiology is a real field with the subject matter, finally, yeah, it's foundational for science. And of course, it terraforms biology because, you know, if you want to poke, if physicists want to poke at biologists who say, well, you just spent your whole life studying one form of biology, What about all the other forms? You don't have a general theory of biology like we have a standard model of particle physics because you've just been studying one thing like staring at your navel. Well, what about all that stuff out there? Okay, so so it'll be a big deal for biology for all of science but on the intelligent life or advanced life, the problem with what happens outside the scientific community is it's not a tabula rasa. It's not a blank slate. The popular culture, especially in the US ian (32:59.524) Hmm. ian (33:08.503) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (33:25.718) but almost everywhere now, is so primed for the fact that, A, it's already there and sure, and B, it's visited, and three, it's abducted some of our people, and four, it can make a list of all the conspiracy theories and wild ideas about alien life. And they're just so embedded in the popular culture that it's like that the fact of the existence of intelligent aliens has been amortized. It's sort of been, it's just already been built in. zack_jackson (33:39.8) Thank you. chris_impey (33:55.698) in to the culture. And so, you know, that would lead to a collective shrug. Well, sure, we knew that, you know, the government's been hiding this stuff from us for 70 years, since Roswell. So, you know, and now your astronomers are coming along and telling us, oh, it exists and you're all excited, really? Oh, come on, you know. So I think that's the larger cultural issue or problem or whatever, it's not a problem, it's just amusing to me. But as far as a religious reaction to this, and I'll say, zack_jackson (34:02.271) Hmm. rachael (34:04.421) Thank you. Bye. zack_jackson (34:05.05) Thank you. Bye. zack_jackson (34:12.722) Ha! chris_impey (34:25.698) the gate that I'm an agnostic, which my wife's a pretty hardcore atheist. And so she gives me a hard time about being agnostic. She thinks that's a kind of, it's a kind of wussy position to take. But I, and I argue with her, we argue vigorously about that one. I argue with her and I use the phrase that was attributed to Feynman. And I think he did say this in the biography of Richard Feynman, famous physicist. His biographer said, zack_jackson (34:43.45) Fantastic. chris_impey (34:55.738) Feynman believed in the primacy of doubt and that he held as a high scientific mark and doubt skepticism and doubt is a is a very high mark of a scientist. So I'm proud to wear that mantle of skepticism doubt of not being sure and being okay with not being sure. So I'm an agnostic but I do keep bad company and some of that bad company is Jesuits. Don't you know, don't don't go drinking with Jesuits. You'll you'll you'll end up in a rachael (34:59.461) Thank you. Bye. ian (35:13.024) Right. zack_jackson (35:14.092) Yeah. chris_impey (35:25.798) and a Rome gutter somewhere and they'll be they'll have got back home safely. With the Buddhists, the other group I hang out with, you don't have to worry about being drunk in a gutter because they really don't drink. They do bend the rules a bit, you know, I've seen them eat a lot of meat for people who are supposed to be vegans and vegetarians. But anyway, those are the two tribes that I've sort of affiliated myself with. And their reactions or perspectives on life in the universe is are quite different. They're interesting. Each the Buddhists that I've been with and I've read behind this of course and read some of their More you know the scholarly articles written about this It is completely unexceptional in their tradition to contemplate a universe filled with life That could be more advanced It could be human like or it could be more advanced or different from humans in also a vast universe with cycles of time and birth and and death of the universe and rebirth of other universes. So the Byzantine possibilities of life in the universe are pretty standard stuff for them and would not surprise them at all. They do get into more tricky issues when they come to define life itself, which biologists of course have trouble with, or sentience, which is also a tricky issue. But on the larger issue of the existence of life in the universe far beyond Earth, that's just non-controversial. zack_jackson (36:48.35) Hmm. chris_impey (36:55.898) to them and when I say that's what we anticipate and that's what scientists expect it's like okay sure and the Jesuits are in a different slightly different space they're of course in an unusual space as we know within the Catholic Church because they're you know they're the scholarly branch you know they're they're devoted to scholarship they from Gregory and the calendar reform they were liberated to measure ian (37:17.944) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (37:25.678) the heavens and then eventually that just segwayed smoothly into doing astronomy research. The Jesuits have been doing pretty straight up astronomical research since certainly the early 19th century, so quite a long time. And they have that sort of intellectual independence of being able to pursue those ideas. All the Jesuit astronomers I know, there are I think 11 or 12 in the Vatican Observatory and they all live the double life. They're all PhD astronomers. rachael (37:37.221) Thank you. chris_impey (37:55.798) with parishes. So it's not a problem. Whoever else, whoever elsewhere might think there's a conflict between science and religion, they don't see it. They don't feel it. And if you ask... Yeah. Yeah. ian (38:05.145) Mm-hmm. zack_jackson (38:06.03) No. And if anyone out there wants to hear more about that, they can listen to episode episode 113 with brother guy, the, uh, the director. Yeah. ian (38:10.246) We have an episode. chris_impey (38:13.821) Right. ian (38:15.343) Director of the Vatican Observatory. chris_impey (38:16.418) Sure, sure. So I've known guys since, well, since he was a grad student actually, and a long time. And yes, and so they, they're pursuing it from a scholarly direction. And for them, it's also uncontroversial that there would be life elsewhere. Now, what is the, you know, what does that do to God's creation when you imagine that Earth and humans are no longer the centerpiece of it? That's a more interesting question. zack_jackson (38:22.034) Wow. chris_impey (38:46.298) I've had debates about that. And I heard Jose Funes, who was the previous director of the Vatican Observatory and Argentinian astronomer, in a press conference actually in the Vatican City State when we had a conference on astrobiology. In response to a question about astrobiology, because that was what the conference was about, he gave a very interesting answer. He said he gave a parable of Christ in the flock of sheep and how there was the sheep that was lost. you know, you had to gather back to the rest of the flock. And he didn't complete the story, he just left it hanging there. And so you were left wondering, are we the lost sheep, you know, and the other, and all the intelligent aliens out there are the rest of the flock? And what's the message, you know? So he sort of almost muddied the waters with his little parable. But in the manner of how they view the universe, zack_jackson (39:27.914) Hmm. rachael (39:28.621) Thank you. Bye. zack_jackson (39:33.792) Hmm. chris_impey (39:46.398) the rules of physics. I used to teach a team graduate cosmology with Bill Staker, who is one of their tribe. Sadly, he died a few years ago. We teach cosmology and he's a relativist. He works on general relativity and the Big Bang and all that. And if I was just wanting to pull his leg at breakfast, we had breakfast before we taught us to organize ourselves. I could do one of two things. I could say, oh, Bill, physics, we got you with physics. is squeezed back to the first 10 to the minus 43 seconds. Got to the gaps, there it is, that's a little gap. And then physics owns the rest, you know. And then if I was really feeling frisky, I'd sort of, since he was a Catholic, I'd tease him about the three impossible things he has to believe every morning before breakfast. Virgin birth, resurrection, et cetera, you know. So I don't know how all those circles are squared truly because we've had, you know, I've had conversations. zack_jackson (40:22.572) Hmm. zack_jackson (40:26.32) Hehehehehe zack_jackson (40:35.05) Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. chris_impey (40:46.798) But I know that it's not a conflict or a tension or even a problem to imagine life in the universe and even intelligent life. So for neither of those two very different religious tribes, does it seem to be an issue? ian (41:06.443) So can you talk more about, especially how you got involved? Cause I think that science for the monks and nuns program was really interesting. And, you know, one, how you got involved, but you know, reading your book Humble Before the Void was just very interesting to kind of see about your experience from there. And you told us before we started recording that you wrote that after your first time going and that you've been there eight or nine times now. What has all of this been like for you? How has it had an impact on your work and also your personal life? if yes and what ways. chris_impey (41:38.798) Yeah, it was a sort of profound, it's been a profound experience since 2008, I guess, so it's almost 15 years and eight trips. So the first time was one of those great things of you come across the transom professionally. Sometimes I got a call from a colleague that I didn't know that well, who he knew I had an education, a good reputation as an educator. And he just called me, he's a postdoc at Berkeley actually, an environmental science postdoc. He said, how'd you like to go and teach the Dalai Lama's monks cosmology? And it's not a question you ruminate over or look at your skit, look at, oh, I'll check my calendar. Let me get back to you. No, you just say yes, and then you make it happen. So I said yes, and then it happened. And I was savvy enough in hindsight to take my 17-year-old Paul with me on that trip. And he'd never been anywhere out, he'd been to Europe a couple of times, but he'd never been to Asia or anywhere exotic. zack_jackson (42:14.65) Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha rachael (42:17.821) Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha zack_jackson (42:23.05) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (42:38.738) if you like. And so that was a profound trip in that sense. It was a bonding with your 17-year-old and you know, we were a little more adventurous together than either of us might have been on our own. And so the context was that invitation. And then I learned that his holiness the Dalai Lama, who famously has said in his autobiography that if he hadn't been selected at age four to be the of compassion would have been an engineer. Fine, that's an interesting statement to make. But, and it meant that when he was a child in Eastern Tibet, in a pretty primitive village, you know, he would just infuriate his parents by taking apart their clocks and mechanical devices and never quite putting them together again. So he had this analytic and mechanical and engineering and scientific mindset even as a child. And then of course his future was cast into the role he had zack_jackson (43:11.134) Hmm. zack_jackson (43:25.992) Hmm. chris_impey (43:38.798) he took. But he's always had that strong interest in science. So he looked around 20 or so years ago and realized that the monastic tradition, his, the Gelug tradition, of course, or other traditions in Buddhism, was sort of outdated. You know, the monastic training was extremely rigorous. They take years and years of rhetoric and philosophy and theology and comparative religion and all sorts of things. But there's very little science, very little math. And in the schools, there's zack_jackson (43:39.972) Bye. chris_impey (44:08.718) very little science and very little math. And he just thought that was unacceptable. He said, my monks and nuns, the nun part actually did come later. And that was a good part of his work to make the level of playing field for monastic training to include nuns. But he just said, these my monastics cannot be prepared for life in the 21st century if they don't have science and math. And so in the manner that he does these things, he just looked around and waved his arm and said, make this happen, you know, and I've now zack_jackson (44:19.05) Thank you. Thank you. zack_jackson (44:30.035) Yeah. zack_jackson (44:37.45) Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe chris_impey (44:38.798) heard from proximity to people in his orbit that his holiness, the Dalai Lama says a lot of things. He has great ideas. He's very activist. He's very visionary. And he says all sorts of things. And people scurry around and sometimes they just ignore him. Sometimes nothing happens. But this one, they decided to make it happen. And what happened was they looked around Dharamsala chris_impey (45:08.658) the blue, who was an educator and a scientist, a young scientist. And they just glommed on to him and they said, Hey, can you help us with this? Can you set something up? And so he set up the science for monks program, then science for monks and nuns. When the nuns came on board and I was one of the early people he called. And so the model was to bring three to four Western teachers in different subjects. The Dalai Lama's core interest. it doesn't mirror a bit his interests, which are evolutionary biology, neuroscience, physics, math, and then environmental sciences come on board too. So it's not every field of science. So these, we would come out as Western teachers and there'd be cohorts of monks and then monks and nuns, about 24 in a group. And we do three week intensive workshops and they're very intense, you know, we're in the classroom six, seven hours a day and then our evening sessions or observing zack_jackson (45:50.671) Hmm. chris_impey (46:08.658) telescopes. So it's kind of grueling actually, but it's inspiring as well. And eventually, the idea is that enough of the monks and nuns will be trained to be educators themselves, and you won't need to depend on Westerners to come out and do this. And they're not really there yet, but they could get there. I don't want them to get there, because then I won't get invited out. So it was a singular experience. And the book I wrote, of course, was fresh, zack_jackson (46:24.494) Hmm. chris_impey (46:38.738) I was really, I wrote it not long after the first trip. And to your question of did it affect me or change me? Well, yes, in many ways, some of which I probably haven't fully appreciated. I mean, first of all, it was a deep embedding in a culture, in a way that I'd never done. I was pretty experienced world traveler, but in that sort of slightly superficial way of someone who goes to Asia and tries to hang out and go to a bar in a local restaurant and see the sights, but you don't really get to know the people ian (47:05.228) Mm-hmm chris_impey (47:08.838) you're moving around. So being three weeks, sometimes four weeks, and then traveling with them afterwards or during, you know, really you get to learn the culture. You also see in these northern Indian towns, most of the workshops are in northern India, there's now in southern India, Bidtabhatta, Nepal for this too. They're mixing very well. India has a, you know, kind of black mark on it right now with its current government of sort of sectarian strife and Most recently with the Sikhs, but also obviously with Muslims But in those little northern Indian villages where there are sometimes 50 percent Buddhist 50 percent Hindus They really get on pretty well. I mean that they're just they're sort of under the radar the geopolitics or the What the Modi government is doing at the time so? It works pretty well, and it's nice to see that So I learned that I saw the culture up close. I would be part of their rituals and go, you know and ian (47:50.666) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (48:08.758) see everything they saw and listen to their prayers and talk to their scholars. And so it was a pretty deep embedding. And then as far as my own life, when I come back, rather than just view it as, you know, amazing experience, I got some beautiful photos. I had these great memories. Um, it did sort of make me reflect a little, uh, because of their, the ethos they had. And their ethos is, is of course very, um, very different from most of a Western ethos. It's a Buddhist are all about compassion and suffering, suffering and compassion. They do go together. They're almost bedfellows. So I got the message, I think very early on, when I was walking towards the lecture hall and it was at one of these Tibetan children villages and they're very poignant places. They're about 11 or maybe now 14 Tibetan children villages in the northern part of India. And that's where the refugees go. ian (48:46.008) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (49:09.158) that escaped. So almost all the monks in my early workshops left Tibet when they were teenagers even younger, brought across the ice fields by family members at great risk. Some didn't make it, others lost toes and fingers from frostbite. They had to go in the winter because the Chinese troops would intercept them and even even then did in the winter. So they were orphans, And they grow up and go to these Tibetan children villages, sort of orphanages, really. And so I was walking towards the lecture hall, which is situated in one of these villages. And there was a hard, scrabble, packed dirt soccer pitch. You know, it looked really uncomfortable for falling. I am enough of a Brit to have experienced playing football soccer on really nice grass, because England does have good grass, you know. And I was thinking, the first thing I thought, damn, I don't want to play football. rachael (50:04.321) Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ian (50:04.525) Right. zack_jackson (50:05.412) Hmm chris_impey (50:08.918) on that field. That would be brutal. So there was this football field and there was a 10-foot wall behind it running the length of the football field, painted white, and on top of it in 10-foot high letters was a slogan of the school, others before self. And I was just thinking, I wonder how many American high schools would have that as their slogan. How would that go down with the, you know, social media, me generation, whatever. rachael (50:10.621) Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ian (50:31.167) Right. rachael (50:31.321) Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha zack_jackson (50:32.25) Hmm ian (50:34.845) Yeah. chris_impey (50:38.918) So that was one thing. And then a series of those little messages sort of sink in about how they do operate differently from us or me. And so one thing it made me reflect on when I went back home was I immediately embedded back in my academic life and hustling the next grant and writing the next paper and talking to my collaborators. And I just realized how really how intensely pressured. rachael (50:40.763) Wow. chris_impey (51:08.658) Darwinian that science, Western science system is, it's kind of, you know, it kind of grinds you down. I mean, I've been hustling for grants from funding agencies for 40 years and I kind of burned out on it, you know, it's hard. It doesn't get any easier because there's younger whippersnappers that are very smart and, you know, they're going to get your grant. So it definitely made me reflect on the sort of hyper competitive nature of some parts of zack_jackson (51:21.042) Hmm. ian (51:21.047) Mm-hmm. rachael (51:28.721) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (51:39.719) and just reflect on what is important. Is it important to know something, or to teach something, or to give something, or to what is important? And how does that work when you're a scientist and educator? And that's it. Thank you for watching. I hope you enjoyed this video. I'll see you in the next one. Bye. ian (51:56.043) Yeah. Well, it's just interesting reading the book and I told you before we're recording. I've not been on to finish it yet, but I look forward to finish it just because, you know, one, you know, as I've already said, you're a fantastic writer for the lay audience, the general public, which is not something, you know, I've, I've worked with many scientists as a science educator and many of the ones I've worked with have said they struggle with that. Right. So I always applaud that. Um, but then just the, the personal experiences you shared and. chris_impey (51:59.833) I'm ian (52:26.163) humble before the void was just very interesting to me, especially someone who I have embraced meditation and mindfulness over the past three or four years and gotten really into it. And so, you know, first when I, when you shared that book with us and saw that the Dalai Lama wrote, you know, the preface for it and everything, I just was immediately fascinated because I find him to be absolutely fascinating in his perspective on things. So chris_impey (52:47.298) Yeah, I mean, I was, I mean, I've been privileged to meet him a couple of times. And, uh, and it's always, uh, a singular experience. Uh, the first time was that first trip out actually. And, and it was in that same Tibetan children village. And that was, this was in the winter. I was a January is a very, um, very difficult time to be there. It's in the foothills of the Himalayas. Quite high up. Dharamsala has trivial factoid that a Brit will appreciate like me. Um, It has the world's highest cricket stadium. And so drum solo, there you go. Now you know, when you get asked that, now you know. So we were in this auditorium, this cold auditorium, very cold, and they'd given the Westerners blankets, put over their legs, and even a few little heaters around. But it was brutal. And he was going to give an opening address. And everyone was full of excitement and anticipation. It was probably 2,000 people. But it was a cold, it was an unadorned Spartan auditorium ian (53:20.331) Oh. zack_jackson (53:20.594) Hmm. Ha ha ha. ian (53:25.403) Exactly. zack_jackson (53:34.892) Hmm. chris_impey (53:47.498) on a below freezing day in the Himalayas. And along that football field outside, which is the way his little, he has the equivalent of a pokemobile, he has the DL mobile or whatever that he comes into a place with, that he was gonna come along the edge of the field. And I'd seen walking in that the school children were starting to assemble in a long row along the side of the football field along the place his vehicle would come. And we were waiting zack_jackson (54:01.775) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (54:17.258) He was late and it was so cold and it was quiet. People were murmuring, nothing was happening. And then suddenly we heard this sound, this wave of singing. So they were singing him in as his vehicle arrived. And I was like, wow, that was so cool. Just the sound of that. And then he came and he just radiates when he's in a room. And he's a little frail. He had trouble getting up the three steps onto the stage. But his grin is just... Oh, it's just... anyone who remelt the hardest heart. He's just so... and his comments are always, you know, they're always kind of offhand and insightful and, you know, he has a very interesting and sensibility. So that's been a remarkable thing. But the monks all had their own insights and I learned a lot from them. I mean, I was teaching them but I was learning a lot from them. And they gave me, you know, when you teach, well, the other thing I didn't say about the ian (55:12.667) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (55:17.418) experience there, which was also restorative for me, is, you know, I depend on my high tech gadgets and my PowerPoints and my whatever. And I was pretty much warned. I said, you're going to be pretty much off the grid. And it was almost like that. And there were a couple of workshops where, you know, if the cold water, if the water was hot, you were lucky. If the power stayed on all day in the classroom, you were lucky. There was hardly any equipment. We make these, these runs rachael (55:25.325) Hmm. chris_impey (55:47.278) These equipment runs down to the local bazaar, and we buy matchsticks and cloth and cardboard and foil and just super primitive ingredients to make experiments back in the classroom, rather than bring stuff out from the West. So you had to improvise, and it was good to do that. It was good to have to lecture and talk and use simple analogies and simple equipment. And so they informed me about that, too, because I wondered how they understood zack_jackson (56:02.75) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (56:17.278) these very abstract things of physics and cosmology. And I think the first striking little insight I had, because I was always reaching for a good analogy. And then, so I sort of turned the tables on one of the monks. I said, well, you have this idea of deep time, which is very interesting. You have a kalpa, which is a day in the life of Brahma. And it's been annotated in some text to be 4.32 billion years, quite a specific number. Happens to be within 10% of the age of the earth. ian (56:45.207) Mm-hmm. chris_impey (56:47.258) go figure. And then there's a great Calpa, which is the lifetime of Brahma. And that's about a trillion years, which to a cosmologist is a very interesting number because that's the stellariferous age of the universe. That's the time into the future for which stars will shine after that the universe goes dark forever. And so it's a very interesting coincidence that two coincidences that the age of the earth is a Calpa and a great Calpa is the rachael (56:48.682) Thank you. Bye. zack_jackson (57:07.05) Hmm. ian (57:09.566) huh chris_impey (57:17.258) universe before it truly goes dark forever. So that was interesting. But then I was asking, following up that knowledge, which was interesting, because most religious traditions do not encompass crisp, precise numbers of that scale. I said, well, what does it mean to you? How do you understand a kalpa? Just a kalpa, the 4.3 billion years. And the monk I was talking to said, well, we imagine, we, so this is a collective analogy that people use, not just him. zack_jackson (57:31.992) Yeah. chris_impey (57:47.678) We imagine a mountain made of granite that's a kilometer high and a kilometer at the base and We imagine a dove that flies by this mountain and brushes it with its wing once a day And it's granite so it only dislodges a few particles and a Calpa is how long it takes the dove to erode the mountain to nothing and I thought wow I get it I got it I got it in my gut and for a scientist analogies are meaningful and metaphors to zack_jackson (58:16.737) Mm-mm. chris_impey (58:17.618) when they get you somewhere other than your head, when they get you in a deeper place, a more visceral place. And so that was just one example, but in the end I heard a number of ways that they conceptualized or analogized or explained really quite difficult concepts in their tradition, or there were scientific concepts very differently than a Western scientist would, but how interesting was that? So I always was captivated by that. zack_jackson (58:45.492) Hmm. ian (58:46.003) Yeah, that is interesting. Well, we are getting close to the end of our time together. And I feel like I could just keep talking to you about all these different experiences, because it just sounds so fascinating, all the different things you've done. Um, is there anything else that we should have asked you about that we just didn't yet? I mean, does you want to share? rachael (58:50.621) That is a beautiful. zack_jackson (58:57.062) Yeah. chris_impey (59:07.558) No, I mean, I could talk a little bit more about the Jesuits because I, you know, I haven't talked about them so much and I know them very well. And I also know the history. I've had the luck to be there and, you know, teach at their summer schools and so on. So they, they do, they do this very nice thing. They started by George Coyne, the long-term director of the Vatican conservatory almost 30 years, who I've known since I was a postdoc. And he's, he facilitated these summer schools where. ian (59:22.665) Oh wow. chris_impey (59:37.518) They get 24 students, first year grads or last year undergrads from around the world, mostly they're majority women, majority developing countries. And they have this, you know, summer school for a month. I've taught at three of them. It's a really great experience. It's on a par with teaching in the Buddhist monks and nuns. Because these people, these kids have often not left their own country. And so suddenly they're in Rome or Castigandolfo outside Rome. you know, in the heart of Europe, they get field trips to Florence, they go and they see all the sites in that month. I mean, it's just a fire hose of cultural experience while they're getting this boot camp on astronomy and some topic in astrophysics. So it's just an amazing experience. And those students now numbering over 400 because they've been going for 30 years are now really senior in astronomy and some of them are directing observatories and it's really cool to watch them zack_jackson (01:00:12.95) Thank you. Thank you. ian (01:00:30.203) Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. chris_impey (01:00:37.658) And that's an amazing thing that the Vatican Observatory has done. And I think what it's done also, of course, has been an emblem of rebuttal for the people who say that science and religion cannot coexist. Because like I said, all all those Jesuits, I know, live the double life and they don't seem to be schizophrenic in any way about that. And also, you know, there's, you know, the Vatican and the Catholic Church did have some, you know, rachael (01:00:52.165) Hahaha ian (01:00:52.467) Right. chris_impey (01:01:07.518) do because, you know, they gave Gallio a very hard time. I mean, I've been to the place where he was on house arrest, his villa with the Villa Gioia, it's a jewel villa outside Florence. It's a pretty, it's got its own vineyard, it's on a hillside, outside Florence. It's a pretty nice place if you're going to be holed up under house arrest, I could think of worse places, but he was blind and it was miserable and he had, he, so, so that was his fate to avoid the torture and the full wrath of the Inquisition. zack_jackson (01:01:09.15) Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. ian (01:01:12.003) Thank you. Bye. zack_jackson (01:01:21.15) Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe rachael (01:01:25.521) Thank you. Bye. ian (01:01:30.888) Right. chris_impey (01:01:37.938) So they had a lot to do to scramble from that it took two century, you know The the church moves slowly so it was good two centuries before they took his book from the band book list and then JP to John Paul II in 1992 got around to sort of exonerating him You know, I would not call it a fulsome apology at that point But it was you know, it was a certain level of me a culpa that they treated him badly The Bruno thing is off to the side because zack_jackson (01:01:56.494) Hmm. chris_impey (01:02:07.458) because there's a lot of misinterpretation of that. Bruno was burned at the stake as, I think the quote is, an impenitent and pertinacious heretic. So it was heresy that got him in trouble, not his astronomy belief. So he's making him a martyr to science that think is very inappropriate. That's not historically correct. An impenitent and pertinacious heretic. rachael (01:02:21.921) Mm-hmm. ian (01:02:25.103) Mm-hmm. zack_jackson (01:02:30.75) Can you say that phrase again? zack_jackson (01:02:35.971) Oh my goodness. chris_impey (01:02:37.598) the rap sheet. I mean, if you ever get arrested, just hope that isn't... Yeah. So that's the context, of course. But then we know that going back to calendar reform and so on, this church has also incubated this pretty interesting scientific activity that doesn't hedge the science at all. They just do the science. There are scholars and they are zack_jackson (01:02:41.15) I need that on my business card. That's fantastic. ian (01:02:43.125) Eheheh chris_impey (01:03:07.498) to follow our ideas. So, you know, I've always appreciated that. And it's not always been a guarantee. So the Vatican politics of that I've also seen up close. And under Benedict, they almost were put out of existence. So Benedict was not, John Paul II was a good supporter. So he was very friendly to science. He was very conservative socially, of course, but on science issues, he was supportive. And he started the ian (01:03:12.567) Hmm. chris_impey (01:03:37.478) Academy sponsoring conferences right there in the heart of the church. They'd have scientific conferences and John Paul supported that and would give the opening speech. It occasionally got twitchy, like when Stephen Hawking went to one of them and he relegated God to a boundary condition of the universe. So there are a few awkward moments, but generally it worked. So they had these conferences and I think it was a very good sign of the rachael (01:03:58.321) Thank you. Bye. chris_impey (01:04:07.518) of liberal thinking about science in that regard. Benedict was not so sympathetic and Benedict was beholden to Opus Dei and Opus Dei have always wanted to put astronomers out of business, shut them down. Like why are we doing this? Why are they here? Let's get rid of it. And so the Vatican Observatory, this is not public knowledge, so maybe I shouldn't even be saying this, but they had a near-death experience under Benedict. And then Francis came along and, oh, sidebar, I'm just boasting a little bit here. I'm up to three popes, rachael (01:04:37.464) Who? chris_impey (01:04:37.839) I met, I met, I met those three. ian (01:04:39.172) that is actually pretty cool. zack_jackson (01:04:41.13) I'm up to three pups, especially for an agnostic. That's good. chris_impey (01:04:43.938) Yeah, yeah, yeah. And I'm I'm an I'm an agnostic but but the first John Paul So that was going back in ways and I had my kids there and one of my kids was very little and My ex-wife was a catholic a lapsed catholic, but her family were very catholic And so they got all excited when they heard we were going to have an audience with the pope And so I was there and I was holding my younger kid in my arms and their photos of this rachael (01:04:44.122) You're collecting them. ian (01:04:45.623) It is pretty good. Three posts in the Dalai Lama, you know? That's... That's... chris_impey (01:05:14.158) you know tries to kuchiku him or whatever and and and my kid and you know Who is this? Who is the who is this scary dude in this white thing? You know, I don't want to so I have this picture of him grimacing and recoiling and and then my ex-mother-in-law who is very Catholic She was chagrin because in one of the photos. It's clear that he's touseling my kids hair and my ex-mother-in-law gave us a zack_jackson (01:05:19.57) Ha ha ha ha! rachael (01:05:23.121) Thank you. Bye. zack_jackson (01:05:23.75) Ha ha ha ha ha. chris_impey (01:05:44.038) time because we didn't preserve that lock. We didn't make it a relic. It should have been a relic. Anyway, so Benedict was anti and the knives were out and Opus Dei was ascending. And then Francis comes in and it's all wonderful and copacetic now because of course Francis is the first Jesuit Pope and he supports science and he's definitely liberal on that issue and it's ian (01:05:47.414) Oh. zack_jackson (01:05:48.231) Oh, as a relic. Ugh! Yeah. ian (01:05:53.403) interesting. zack_jackson (01:06:03.772) Hehehehehe chris_impey (01:06:13.878) doing the astronomy. And I even have a nice little story about that, because Jose Funes, who I mentioned earlier was a previous Vatican observatory director before Guy Consomagno. Funes is an Argentinian, as Francis is. And back in the day, Jose Funes, the Vatican, to be Vatican observatory director for 10 years, was a seminary student in Buenos Aires in the seminary school. Hope was then the bishop of that diocese. And Jose told this great story. He was a seminary student and his mom would come and bring him a little carrot, a basket of goodies and baked things and whatever every Sunday. And so she had arrived and she was walking in one of the portals of the seminary school and she looked off to the side and it was the laundry room. And she noticed and recognized the bishop, now Pope Francis, washing the seminarians clothes underwear whatever and She was very shy and modest woman But she was so shocked by this that she rushed over and said no no you know no you shouldn't do this This is inappropriate and he just laughed and waved her off So the humility is real. I mean that was just a great a great little story about Francis before he became a pope ian (01:07:32.945) Yeah. ian (01:07:37.783) Wow. Yeah. Oh yeah. All right. Well, I think, yeah. One final question. We have gone a little over time, but there's something that Zach started doing when we started interviewing the Sinai Snapsys fellows, which is where we all met. It's a great question to end with. And so I always like using it is, what do you wish that everyone knew? Like if you were able to beam information into zack_jackson (01:07:38.755) fan. ian (01:08:07.925) around the world. What would it be? chris_impey (01:08:10.458) Hmm. I mean, as in a science factoid or just about whatever. Well, I guess, okay, I guess, uh, since I'm so into exoplanets, there's going to have to be something about that that most people don't know. So what I would want everyone to know is that in the universe, there are more planets than stars, which means there are 10,000 billion billion planets in the universe. I want people to know. ian (01:08:14.084) It's whatever you want. ian (01:08:38.703) Thank you. Thank you. zack_jackson (01:08:39.77) That's wild. ian (01:08:42.043) Yeah, I think I got to the part of your book where you mentioned something about you're more stars than grains of salt, right? Or no, more planets and grains of sand. Right. And it was just, yeah, it's just amazing. Okay. Well, thank you, Chris. Yeah, for joining us today. This was an outstanding conversation. chris_impey (01:08:49.759) Right, right, yeah. zack_jackson (01:08:52.271) Hmm. Well, thank you so much. chris_impey (01:08:57.498) Yeah, no, it's fine. I enjoyed it too. Good, great questions.

Episode 120 Today we are joined by Dr Emily Smith to talk about epidemiology, the dangers of truth telling, and how the story of the Good Samaritan changed everything for her.  She is an assistant professor in the department of emergency medicine/surgery at Duke University and at the Duke Global Health Institute (DGHI). During the COVID-19 pandemic, she became known as the Friendly Neighbor Epidemiologist through her social media outlets which reached over 10 million people in 2020-2021. She continues posting on the social account and her Substack blog with a monthly reach of 2-4 million. Her work has been featured in TIME Magazine, NPR, the Washington Post, Christianity Today, and Baptist News Global. Before joining the faculty at Duke University, she spent four years at Baylor University in the department of public health and was a research scholar at DGHI for two years. She received her Ph.D. in epidemiology from the Gillings School of Global Public Health at UNC Chapel Hill and a MSPH from the University of South Carolina.  She has been married to her pastor-husband for 20 years and they have two fantastic children, one spoiled golden retriever and a new very-friendly golden doodle puppy. Her debut book, The Science of the Good Samaritan: Thinking Bigger About Loving Our Neighbors, released on Oct. 24, 2023 from Zondervan. I’m very excited to welcome Dr. Emily Smith to the show today.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    AI Generated Transcript Ian (00:04.911) Okay. So our guest today is an assistant professor in the department of emergency medicines surgery at Duke university and at the Duke global health Institute. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she became known as the friendly neighbor epidemiologist through her social media outlets, which reached over 10 million people in 2020 and 2021. She continues posting on the social account and her sub stack blog with a monthly reach of two to 4 million people. Her work has been featured in Time Magazine, NPR, The Washington Post, Christianity Today, and Baptist News Global. Before joining the faculty at Duke University, she spent four years at Baylor University in the Department of Public Health and was a research scholar at DGHI for two years. She received her PhD in epidemiology from the Gillings School of Global Public Health at UNC Chapel Hill and MSPH from the University of South Carolina. She's been married to her pastor husband for 20 years and they have two fantastic children. one spoiled golden retriever and a newly and a new very friendly golden doodle puppy. Her debut book, the science of the good Samaritan thinking bigger, bigger about loving our neighbors released on October 24th, 2023. I'm very excited to welcome Dr. Emily Smith to the show today. Emily Smith (01:15.144) I'm very excited to welcome you all. Thank you for having me. It's a pleasure to be here for sure. Ian (01:21.518) Yeah. Um, as I was saying before we started recording, you know, I've found you because of your Facebook account and was just always amazed, obviously with your expertise in the science and, um, everything you were sharing, but also your lens as an evangelical Christian. Um, I thought that was really fascinating and trying to work with those two communities, right? Trying to kind of be a boundary, uh, spanning individual for that. But I think before we really get into that. Emily Smith (01:43.734) Yeah. Ian (01:50.162) I would love for you to just kind of talk to us a little bit about what drew you to epidemiology. Emily Smith (01:56.476) Yes, and prior to the pandemic, I don't think a lot of people knew what that word meant. By the way, it's seven syllables, and so throw that into a Thanksgiving meal or something if you need a big word to kind of wow family with. But, you know, people would get us confused with skin doctors, like epidermis instead of epidemics, or entomology, which I think is bugs, right? Yeah, it's just another really big E word. I don't know. So now... Zack Jackson (02:00.95) Ha ha ha. Ian (02:19.548) It is. Yes. Zack Jackson (02:19.756) Yeah. Emily Smith (02:26.068) People know kind of what we are and who we're about just because we've all come out of the pandemic. So if you need the nerdy, jeopardy definition of what that is, before I get into how I got into the field, is the distribution and determinants of disease. And so what makes a disease spread and who is at risk? I tend to say, you know, clinicians and nurses and dentists, they... focus on one-on-one patients at a time, and we focus on one community or population level at a time, so the aggregate of a lot of individuals. I grew up in a tiny town in Eastern New Mexico, 10 miles from the Texas border, so it is West Texas culture, flat land, great sunsets and oil fields, and really good people. But it was a really small town and a lovely town. And I just was always loved science. My eighth grade science teacher started talking about DNA and y'all would have thought he was talking about Beyonce or something. I was just like, what is this? And it's magic. And so he gave me a college textbook. This is as nerdy as it gets. Now it's kind of cool to be a nerd back then in the 90s. I guarantee it was not near as cool to wear glasses. Yeah. Zack Jackson (03:44.687) Ugh. Right? Emily Smith (03:48.5) So he, and I read it, I read it on a band trip, which is like double nerd points. But I just loved science and math. I don't know what it was, but he hooked me up with the first female scientist that I had ever met at Texas Tech University. And I started doing a science fair project with her in high school, because there really wasn't the capacity to do anything like that, you know, at my traditional high school, because it was too small. Ian (03:48.514) Mm-hmm. Emily Smith (04:16.668) And so I still thought I'm going to do something in science, but I had also grown up in the church and our family hosted a lot of missionaries that came into our church. And so I heard their stories. They were very gracious to listen to an eight-year-old, nine-year-old little questions about the world and their adventures. So early on, I knew I wanted to do, I thought I wanted to be a missionary and I still just love the science. And so I went to church. The natural way to do that is go pre-med. I kind of thought the only way to do that is through medical school, so let's just do that. So I did, I chose medical school as a goal and took the MCAT, I got into med school, got married straight out of college to my pastor husband, and his first job in the church was all the way across the country in South Carolina. So I had a gap year. Ian (04:50.218) Mm. Zack Jackson (04:50.222) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (05:13.506) Hmm. Emily Smith (05:15.872) And I, I mean, I'm just a nerd, so I decided let's just get another degree because it's what we do when we have a gap year, right? Yeah, I mean, yeah, a lot of people might as well. Yeah. And it was in public health because I thought it'd look good for medical school. Day one of epidemiology, my professor, who was really just inspirational anyways, he did the jeopardy definition of epi. But then he said, this is a... Ian (05:22.764) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (05:23.932) Right. Ian (05:25.748) Not as well. Emily Smith (05:44.192) This is an equity science because most of the time we're gonna be working at people who are on the margins in these communities that are marginalized for health or poverty. And growing up in the church, it just clicked in my mind that that's the science of the Good Samaritan. It's quantifying the people who are most at need and then choosing not to walk by. So I didn't go to medical school, went to PhD in Epi instead and history from there. But I... I also remember going to my first mission trip on the Mercy Ship to Honduras. And when the doctors were focusing one-on-one on these people who had traveled a very long way to get to care, I was naturally asking the bigger picture questions about poverty or why this community has such high rates of... you know, diabetes or surgical needs when others didn't. And those are inherently epi questions. I just didn't know it at the time. Ian (06:45.983) That's interesting. Zack Jackson (06:48.766) Yeah. So you mentioned this is the science of the Good Samaritan, which is, uh, the title of your newly released book. Congratulations. Has that been a story that has that clicked with you then, or is this more of a recent connecting of the dots? Has this story been in, in your heart and mind this whole time? Ian (06:48.776) Yeah. Emily Smith (06:52.662) Yeah. Emily Smith (06:58.037) Thank you. Emily Smith (07:10.172) Oh, the whole time, for sure. I love that story of the Good Samaritan. And a lot of people are familiar with it, even if you're not of the Christian faith. You know, it's that story of where there's a man on the side of the road who is very sick. I mean, sick enough, hurt enough, where he can't help himself. And two people walk by. Jesus is telling this story, by the way. And those people are noted as religious leaders. And so they're kind of the people who... Ian (07:11.913) Okay. Emily Smith (07:38.504) represent power and privilege of the day, but there's one person who actually stopped who's the Samaritan. And in that time, that would have been not who you expected to be highlighted in a story. They typically do not have the places of power or privilege in the religious time of the day, but he stopped and he helped the man. And not only that, he helped him, he bandaged him up, he took him to a place to recover, and then he paid for all of it. And it's just a holistic view of what helping, you know, true solidarity and helping means. So I think that story just growing up in the church has always very much resonated with me wanting to do missions. But then when I got into EPPE, it resonated on a scientific level. Ian (08:26.198) Interesting. I love how at the very beginning of the book, you know, you have all those little quotes before you get into the reading itself and, you know, talking, you know, from Mark, uh, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. And then you kind of go into, you know, well, this is what health is the greatest of gifts from Buddhism, perform all work carefully guided by compassion from Hinduism. Then you go on with Islam, Judaism, and then you end, which I thought was really sweet with your kid. Emily Smith (08:32.139) Yeah. Emily Smith (08:52.885) Yeah. Ian (08:54.418) love your neighbor, that's just being a good human. That really resonated with me because I'm actually teaching a science and religion class at UNC Charlotte. And I wanted it to be not a science and Christianity class. I wanted it to focus on multiple religions. And so I'm doing it for the first time. And what, I mean, yes, this is coming more from a Christian lens, but what made you even include all of that in there? Because I thought that was really interesting. Emily Smith (08:57.041) Yeah. Emily Smith (09:04.756) Yeah. Emily Smith (09:24.344) Yes, one of my biggest fears about releasing this book is it being misconstrued as a Christian faith book and making that the center of all faiths. I work with all faiths. I work in predominantly Muslim countries. I've definitely worked with all faiths during the pandemic, but then that quote with my kid at the end. You know, you don't have to be of any faith to just want to be a good human. He said that during the pandemic when he didn't understand why so many people were angry at me. Cause he lived through it. They heard and saw different things too. And so he just couldn't understand why being a good human wasn't just the top of the list for everybody. So I didn't want this book to come out even unconsciously. Zack Jackson (10:06.053) Ugh. Emily Smith (10:22.472) making people feel like you have to be of the Christian faith. That's the center of the world or the center of all faiths. Cause it's just not, there are gorgeous expressions of faith or non-faith or just being a good human around. And I wanted to be very careful in that. Also, when you read the book, you'll see that Christianity has been poorly centered for the sake of conquest or colonialism or We see it even nowadays right here in America of we need to put the 10 commandments back in a courthouse or say a prayer before football games, but that's just a Christian prayer that's not inclusive of all. And I did not wanna be one of those people that even unconsciously said you have to be a Christian because I just, I don't think you do. You're beautiful people in the world. So thank you for talking about that. It was important to start the book for me with that. Zack Jackson (10:54.766) Hmm. Ian (11:15.5) Yeah. Emily Smith (11:19.176) kind of foundation. Zack Jackson (11:21.474) Hmm. Ian (11:22.014) Yeah, I thought that, like I said, it just really resonated with me and it probably because I'm coming from the lens of the class I'm teaching. Um, you know, I am a Christian Episcopalian, but I have always been very curious and fascinated by other religious traditions and I just love learning about them. Um, and so I love that you had that in there. And I just remember right away, just running to my wife, being like, Oh, look at this. And, um, so. Emily Smith (11:28.681) Yeah. Emily Smith (11:39.232) Yeah. Emily Smith (11:45.628) Yeah, well and I also didn't want to proselytize even some unconsciously. It's just I'm not a sneak attack Christian and I don't want to view people as projects. You know, I think the evangelical church has done a really bad job at that. And it's just not in my wheelhouse. I wanted to make that very clear. Zack Jackson (11:52.523) Mm. Ian (12:02.825) Mm-hmm. Ian (12:08.787) Yeah. Zack Jackson (12:09.006) Sneak attack Christians. That's such a good phrase. That... Ian (12:11.955) It is. Emily Smith (12:13.508) People are people, not projects. Ian (12:15.56) Yeah. Zack Jackson (12:15.734) Yeah. Oh man, I got to get that on cross stitch somewhere in my house. Emily Smith (12:19.828) There you go! I like that. Ian (12:22.422) So you in here, you know, not everyone who's listening has read the book yet, but what made you decide when the pandemic started? What made you decide to create your friendly neighbor epidemiologist? Emily Smith (12:38.716) Yeah, and you know, I was at two conferences right when Wuhan was starting to ramp up in March, 2020. And we, this is our training, this is our lane. You know, this is our day to really step in and go for it. So once we saw, and when I say we, I say public health and epidemiologists, we saw how this new virus was acting and what was happening. A lot of us paid attention pretty, significantly to what was happening. Cause what was, it was different than Ebola. You know, Ebola is awful. And hopefully we'll talk about where I talk about that chapter in the book. But when someone is sick and contagious, you kind of know it. Cause it's really horrific in visual. With this, it looked like it was COVID or well, well we weren't even calling it COVID at the time. Whatever was happening. maybe people were spreading it before they even knew they were infectious and contagious. And so it could catch a lot of people off guard. My day job here at Duke is also working with health equity communities around the world in very poor countries where they're affected daily by bad access to healthcare, poverty. And so if this really was going to be the pandemic that people have been predicting for years. the margins were gonna be affected the most. So everything in me was just kind of like rising of uh-oh. So I get home and a lot of people were asking questions of what does flatten the curve mean? Do we need to buy a billion rolls of toilet paper? And the answer was always no. Oh, bye. I know, and don't hoard, that's just classic America, isn't it? But also there was a lot. Ian (14:23.158) People did it anyway though, yeah. Ian (14:29.416) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (14:30.951) Yeah. Emily Smith (14:32.412) And I, I re we all remember, I mean, this is a real fear. I do want to honor that of people who are high risk, the elderly, you know, do I need to be scared basically. And I wanted to calm fears, but not squash them because it was scary. So I decided why not, why don't I just start a Facebook page for the handful of real life neighbors that I had and like my family. Really, I mean, it was just very, very genetic, generic, not genetic. So I named it Friendly because I tend to be too friendly. Like if I sit by you on an airplane, I'm very sorry. Um, cause I, I'm, I really am anyways, it's just who I am. And I'm trying to accept that, but neighbor because of the good Samaritan story, I knew that COVID in particular was going to imply that we needed to neighbor one another well. We were going to have to take care of the margins. There's going to be a lot of solidarity of staying home for those that couldn't. Get the vaccines for those where it would not work. There just was a lot of neighboring that was going to take place. So I named it because of that. I'm also a pastor's wife. So I thought this is going to be prime time for the church, the Big C Church to be the church. And I say that, I know listeners can't hear it, but I say that with a smile, not as sarcasm, but I was so idealistic at, I really thought this was gonna be our time to shine and take care, you know, live, love thy neighbor really out in full blown faith. So I named it Friendly Neighbor Epidemiologist. And the only people that followed at the beginning were real life people that I knew. And then when the pandemic, Ian (16:13.408) Yeah. Emily Smith (16:23.676) started shifting. We all saw this when it became weirdly political. When national leaders started talking about it as the China virus or these othering type, I was going, what is happening? That is not the faith that I ascribe to. And then when it became, you know, faith that were fear, we started hearing that and people started saying that instead of wearing a mask. I was like, you have not read Galatians five in the Bible. Ian (16:37.314) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (16:47.15) Hmm. Emily Smith (16:53.192) You might say faith over fear, but that's not true faith. So I started posting about that too, from this perspective of pure science and then weaving in the faith part to try to help people anchor in a different way than perhaps they were able to anchor at their own churches. And that seemed to resonate with a lot of people for good and bad ways. So then it started going viral. George Floyd was murdered. And I talked... Zack Jackson (17:18.55) Hmm. Emily Smith (17:22.724) into that conversation at, especially in the white church, there's a difference between all lives matter and black lives matter and why that distinction is important. People couldn't understand. So it'd go viral for that. And I wasn't doing this to go viral. I don't actually think I was noticing what was happening because I was just busy writing and daily posting. And then the Capitol riot happened and I wrote about that one and that one really kind of exploded. Zack Jackson (17:29.91) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (17:47.906) Hmm. Emily Smith (17:53.748) So that's how I got into it. I'm sure we can talk about the nuances, but that's how it initially started. Ian (17:59.362) And you alluded to, you know, your children seeing the things being said about you and everything. What surprised you most as it started going viral with the reactions? Like, because you, you share some things in here and that were really challenging to read and you in there though, even said that, um, I will not share everything. And so I just, I can't imagine. Emily Smith (18:13.341) Yeah. Emily Smith (18:19.457) Really? Ian (18:30.134) the pain you went through and, but you, I love that you embraced your vulnerability with that because I also, I'll be honest. Yes, I, I am a Christian, but there are many times, especially over the last several years, and Zach knows this very well that I have a really hard time saying I'm a Christian because of the extreme baggage that comes with it. But I feel like if I say it, I have to qualify it really. And yeah, we had Brian McLaren on, um, Emily Smith (18:47.032) Oh, for sure. Yeah. Yes. Zack Jackson (18:47.054) Mm-hmm. Emily Smith (18:53.98) Oh, absolutely. Ian (18:58.342) last, what, May of 22. And we talked a lot about it then as well, because it just the extreme hate that I felt like we were seeing that, I guess, has always been there. But now is more acceptable to be said. And so I'm just curious, you are I've never been a member of an evangelical Christian community in that way. And so I'm just curious what surprised you the most or if you don't mind sharing some of that. Emily Smith (19:00.52) Nice. Emily Smith (19:26.896) Yeah, yes and that you know this portion of the book the book is separated into three different sections centering cost and courage um had to be three c's like a good Baptist I guess but that middle section is the thank you for that or evangelical I grew up charismatic and married a Baptist pastor and now we go to a liturgical church so I'm not sure what I am at this point. Did you? Zack Jackson (19:39.138) Yes. Zack Jackson (19:46.531) same. Ian (19:51.925) Yeah. Zack Jackson (19:52.466) I grew up charismatic and went to a Baptist seminary and married my wife there. And then now I'm a part of a mainline denomination. So look, I'm there with you. Emily Smith (20:01.976) Maybe that's just a natural. There's a lot of us out there. Maybe that's a progression. Yeah. Are you? Yeah, I have to figure out where to, like the call and response, do I say the bold or not? Because I would get it wrong or stand and sit. I just get it wrong a lot, but whatever. The church is fine about it. So the middle cost section is the shortest part of the book. Zack Jackson (20:05.174) Yeah. I'm seeing it more and more. Yeah. Ian (20:06.559) Yeah. Emily Smith (20:27.492) It was by far the hardest to write and the hardest to read on the audio. I read the audio book and when I was recording it, I realized the, these chapters still feel so messy. Um, and it's because I just couldn't do more. I couldn't get it. I couldn't package it in a way that some of the other chapters felt pretty and tidy and bowed up. And anyways, it feels like there's a lot of ums and ohs in that chapter because it is incredibly painful. Zack Jackson (20:39.075) Hmm. Emily Smith (20:57.472) We were in Texas at the time. We were in the belly of the beast, that kind of feels like, of Waco, Texas. Great, great people there. But also the buckle of the Bible belt, probably the latch of the buckle. So what surprised me is when I started talking more and more about faith over fear, we started getting little trickles. I say we. I started getting little trickles of pushback from that online. And, you know, it's horrific stuff. It's not, I mean, you get called names and people, you know, you can put that aside. But when I started getting pictures of people sending pictures of guns and Holocaust imagery to me and saying awful things about my children, you know, threats against them, it became very real. Zack Jackson (21:45.762) Hmm. Emily Smith (21:53.5) And then one day in the middle of it, my husband came in and brought in a letter that was in our mailbox that was written in black and red marker. And it was an awful threat. And it was laced with, you know, you're part of the mark of the beast and a lot of these religious overtones, which I had heard and received for months at that point, but not in my mailbox. I mean, that is when it became too crazy. Zack Jackson (22:11.894) Oof. Ian (22:17.771) Mm-hmm. Emily Smith (22:22.732) close. You know, there's a cost that was to me, but then this was going to be a cost to the whole family and to the church, to our church. We ended up leaving the faith community. That not all faith, but that one. Some of the worst threats and harassment I got were people from within my own neighborhood or people that I worshiped with. Those are the ones that I won't share because I just can't talk about it yet. Zack Jackson (22:45.451) Mm. Emily Smith (22:51.676) The book is not a COVID book because I can't talk about it for 200 pages, nor do I think people want to read about it. The cost was awful because we couldn't let our kids go walk in around the neighborhood without one of us. They had safe homes that they could go in if they ever felt scared. They don't know why we were saying that. We just said, if there's a rainstorm, run to these five homes or Ian (22:58.166) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (23:00.579) Hmm. Ian (23:11.19) Hmm. Ian (23:19.49) Mm-hmm. Emily Smith (23:20.488) and they still don't know that. And that's very tender for me as a mom to have to hold. And two, at that time, it was also feeling like I was losing a foundation of faith because I grew up with Sandy Patty, Michael W. Smith, Bethel worship, I mean, come on now, really good, yeah. All of that evangelical stuff. And I remember watching the prayer rally that happened in November, 2020, and I'm sure, Zack Jackson (23:39.222) Yes. Emily Smith (23:49.32) you guys watched it as well, you know, on the Capitol steps, Michael W. Smith is there, Franklin Graham, I mean, these, it was a massive thousands of people rally. And this was also at the height of that first surge before vaccines. So my soul could not reconcile how that was standing on faith when I put the number in the book of how many died that day, but it was at the peak of the deaths in the US, like morgue trucks. you know, scenarios. I couldn't, I just couldn't reconcile like, so I felt like we were losing our faith community, losing jobs, you know, or leaving jobs, losing real life friends. And then these foundations that I had just anchored in were, I was just losing that as well. So it's just difficult. I do wish Ian (24:19.915) Mm-hmm. Emily Smith (24:45.556) that I could have shielded my family from some of that and just taken more of the brunt of it. But it's just part of the, you know, it's part of the cost of us as a family. And I wanted to put some of that vulnerability in because I think a lot of people, especially from the faith communities, have lost a lot. Or Thanksgiving's and Christmases have been very hard and are still hard. I just get that. Ian (24:55.126) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (24:55.138) Hmm. Zack Jackson (25:09.826) Hmm. Emily Smith (25:12.552) At the same time, it's the tip of the iceberg of what I did put in there. So I wanted to be careful to not put too much just cause I couldn't talk about it. Ian (25:20.235) Yeah. Zack Jackson (25:22.156) Yeah. Ian (25:22.61) When I appreciate, like I said, I appreciate, I I'm someone who embraces vulnerability. Um, and you know, I really love Brene Brown's work around that too. But I very much appreciated you sharing that with all of us and the readers because I just, it was tough. It was tough to read and, um, but I admire that you continued to work a lot. You know, I really appreciate that too, because Emily Smith (25:31.197) Yeah, for sure. Emily Smith (25:48.926) Yeah. Ian (25:52.438) You are still continuing to do what you can to save lives. Emily Smith (25:57.94) Well, and that was a choice. I mean, there was a point in there where a couple of the threats, I mean, we were working with high up authorities at certain parts of it. And I just asked my husband, do we need to just stop? Do I need to, well, do I need to stop basically? Cause I would, I would have just pulled all of it. It was not worth having a child, having one of my kids hurt or worse. And so we took a little bit of a break there in the middle of it to kind of discern and use wisdom and then I just decided to keep going with certain parameters in place of Some cameras and Authorities and some backup plans also Some boundaries around what I would or wouldn't stay who I would or wouldn't listen to I got asked to come on Far right like Breitbart type podcast and just I automatically just saying no to that. I mean, that's just a boundary. So it was a it was a choice to keep going. But it was also at a cost. I mean, that was before I got sick in 2021. My body just said no more. And I just had a I don't know if it's a thunderclap or just a massive migraine never had it before. And it just put me in bed for 15 months. So it Ian (27:23.838) Yeah, that reading that was tough too. I, yeah. And I just, because it just, I felt like your pain that you were experiencing, at least some of it was coming across, which again, I, I appreciated that a lot. Um, and I have a very dear friend of mine that was in my PhD program with that deals with migraines. I don't think she deals with them as much anymore. This was, you know, back between 2004 to 2008, but I knew right before she started the PhD program, Zack Jackson (27:24.148) Ugh. Emily Smith (27:26.952) Was it? Yeah. Emily Smith (27:38.125) Yeah. Ian (27:52.266) she would have them where she would be bedridden for like a month or something like that. And just, I couldn't imagine what that was like, but even, you know, I know I asked you how things are going now with you and your family and you told us prior to recording that things are getting better. And, and, but again, you made the choice to continue trying to save lives. Like I think that's very admirable. And so I, that's one of the reasons why I was so excited to get you here. Emily Smith (27:54.74) Yeah. Oh, for sure. Ian (28:20.934) And to read your book because that truly is admirable because you know, I have faced hateful things just because of stuff I do with science and religion for a long time now, nothing compared to what you've done. But there have been plenty of times where I've thought, I can't, I'm not doing this anymore. Like, it's just not worth it. Um, and it was nowhere near to the scale of what you have experienced. And so I just, I think it gives a lot of people hope. And I just wanted to make sure you knew that. Emily Smith (28:37.333) Yeah. Zack Jackson (28:37.559) Yeah. Emily Smith (28:45.052) Yeah, well thank you. There was also a scrappy piece of me that did not want to let them win. And because there were there were months of being bedridden in an incredibly dark room, I mean laughing would send me to weeks of a migraine that no amount of medicine, including hospital type medicine, would touch. Ian (28:55.039) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (28:55.313) Hmm Emily Smith (29:11.484) And so I, there was a little bit of a fight in me too. I just, I was so terrified that was gonna be the rest of my life. And I was doing everything possible to get out of it. And so now that I've come out of it a little bit more, the tenacity, the scrappiness to keep going means not only did like the bad people, they did not win, but also living into probably who, I am more of myself now than I have ever been because of it, because I'm a whole lot braver and courageous than I thought was actually in me. So thank you for saying that, because I think we hear stories of overcoming something and it looks like it was an overnight thing and you just believed your way out of it. And this is not the prosperity gospel. It is really difficult stuff. Zack Jackson (29:43.149) Mm. Zack Jackson (30:00.311) Hahaha! Zack Jackson (30:04.023) now. Emily Smith (30:08.7) you know, just day by day, I'm just doing, I'm just so grateful to be doing my job again. Ian (30:14.475) Yeah. Ian (30:18.07) Zach, did you have anything to add? Just, yeah. It's just, it's very inspirational, so thank you. Emily Smith (30:23.693) Thank you. Zack Jackson (30:25.222) Oh, you remind me of Julian of Norwich, my favorite dead Christian. Um, are you familiar with her story at all? Yeah. How she, uh, asked, asked Jesus for, uh, an encounter as close to death as possible so she could get to the heart of things and then to come back and be able to share that and the amount of revelation she encountered on those dark nights in that bed, um, changed her. Emily Smith (30:28.618) Yeah. Emily Smith (30:32.574) Yes. Emily Smith (30:35.892) Oh, for sure. Yes, I am. Zack Jackson (30:54.31) and really clarify the rest of her life. And I'm hearing that a lot from you as well. That's beautiful. Emily Smith (31:03.592) Yeah, she was probably a little bit more full of faith in the bed. I was just like, what is happening and I want out. Zack Jackson (31:14.283) Yes, but when she says, yeah, when she says all will be well and all will be well and all manner of things shall be well, she's saying it from that bed. And so it actually means something instead of the sort of, you know, pithy platitudes that you would see on a bumper sticker or a greeting card. And so when you talk about it and you talk about hope and change and good things, I feel, I believe it more. Emily Smith (31:14.842) This is not okay. Emily Smith (31:33.113) For sure. Yeah. Zack Jackson (31:42.262) you know, because you've been through the flames. One of the things that I found Emily Smith (31:42.724) Yeah, that passage in particular that she said is, oh go ahead, there was a little, I was saying one of the things about that passage that you just quoted, that's what my husband would tell me just nearly daily during those really dark times, all shall be well and all, yeah all of that. So that's very special. Zack Jackson (31:53.025) Nope, go ahead. Zack Jackson (32:09.542) Yeah, that's my mantra. I repeat to myself almost a daily basis. Emily Smith (32:14.963) Yes. Zack Jackson (32:17.75) Yeah. One of the things that surprised me in reading some of your work, when I hear about epidemiology, I think of, well, that's spread of disease, clearly. But that's such a small part of your book and a small part of your writing. And I'm reading about gun violence and systemic racism and injustices and economics and... all kinds of things that have nothing to do with disease? Am I reading epidemiology wrong as a study or is it that this is all just a part of how your heart works? Emily Smith (33:03.692) probably a both and of that. But epidemiology is not just the pandemic, epidemic, you know, disease detective type stuff that they make movies of. It's that, but it's also anything that affects a certain group of people differently than another group of people. And so that could be, you know, in my work, that's poverty and children's health. It could be who is affected the most by congenital Zack Jackson (33:05.687) Hmm Emily Smith (33:33.356) chronic type condition. So it's a really broad field than just disease detectives. Zack Jackson (33:41.376) Okay. Ian (33:41.378) All right. Well, so, and I remember your chapter, Trickle Up Economics. And so I'll be honest, Emily, there are so many, like I've now been putting like little markers in here, but I've folded down so many pages that I can't get, oh sorry, I can't get to everything I wanna say. So you made something and I can't find everything again because I just, I have comments on almost every single page. Emily Smith (34:03.124) Oh Zack Jackson (34:09.218) We'll leave a link in the description. Emily Smith (34:09.484) Oh yay! I'm gonna hang your reference business. Thank you. Ian (34:10.414) And your references in the end and stuff. And especially, so, you know, I'm also a fellow academic. And so I just was pulling your references. And I was like, oh my gosh, this is so amazing, honey. And just, and also too, I started down like the anti-racism journey. And I think 2016. And so some of the things I was aware of, but it was nice to also reread it and stuff, but that the chapter on trickle up economics, when you talk about, um, the question you ask us is, do you want to know the main factor per Emily Smith (34:15.613) Yes. Emily Smith (34:26.858) Oh yeah. Ian (34:40.302) Uh, predicted. Do you want to know what main factor predicted descending into poverty and not being able to climb back out, even when you account for everything else and it was having a child who needed surgery, which I was not at all surprised. Obviously it was health related, but that part and the part I'm trying to remember too, is that just for the communities in Somaliland or was that just also applicable worldwide? Emily Smith (34:50.57) Yeah. Emily Smith (35:06.176) it's applicable worldwide that look like, I mean the margins countries, you know, the poorest countries for sure. Yeah, yeah, and that, um, that was not something that we expected either. You know, in my day job, I work in communities like in Somaliland, which is the fourth poorest country of the world, on children who need surgical care. And so we know there's a group of kiddos who can get to, you know, a hospital when they need it. Ian (35:08.17) Okay. Right, yeah. Okay. Emily Smith (35:34.752) there's a whole slew of them that can't for reasons that are not their fault, nor their family's fault. That's the structure system, systemic racism, structural violence type stuff that happens. So we had been working with our community partners within the country for starting in 2016, trying to map out in the country, where are the kids who need the greatest care? How far do they have to travel? I mean, it is hours and hours and hours on wheelbarrows and stuff that is just not equity. It's just not what we would want for our children by a landslide. And then we started teasing the data. This is part of epidemiology that I love is you start with the margins and then you go further in to get the truth of the story. Cause that's what laws and legislations are built on, policies. And we found that There were a group of families in Somaliland that went into poverty because of something and never came out. There were some that were able to climb out of poverty. We see this in the US, right? Someone goes to the ER. If you have an insurance or a nest egg or family members that could chip in, it's going to be a huge expense. Some go into poverty and can come out and others can't. So in Somaliland, that's what happened. And we started looking at those families at what was different about them than the rest of them. I thought it was gonna be the income level of the family or the number of kiddos that they had to feed, but it was having a kid with surgical care. And so we took that to the United Nations as a policy effort in 2019. There was a big summit there for universal health coverage. And it's asking the question of what basically is going to be covered under a universal health coverage package. We know it's going to be vaccines and taking care of the sniffles, you know, primary care stuff. But what about surgery? Because that is what is impoverishing people. So we went to make that statement. And the chapter is about starting with the stories of the margin and then trickle your way back up. Emily Smith (37:48.976) instead of the whole trickle-down capitalism type where you put, you know, a hundred dollars in Jeff Bezos mailbox and you hope it reaches the poorest of the poor in inner Detroit. So it was a very, it was really interesting finding for me, but it also linked the story, their story, hopefully to policy change at the highest levels. Zack Jackson (38:00.546) Hmm. Ian (38:10.634) Yeah. Well, I've always said that I, I think it's, um, shameful that our country, which is the richest country, I believe in the history of the world, that anyone in this country could ever go into poverty because of healthcare or that people are in poverty, but still there's so many things there, right? But that healthcare can make people go bankrupt. I, Emily Smith (38:29.96) and we're the number one. Yeah. Ian (38:39.958) will never understand that with the amount of money and wealth in this one country that that's possible. It just is absolutely mind boggling to me. And then of course it elsewhere, right? I mean, you talk about in this chapter of like the wealth of like the 10 richest people or whatever the number was and what that could do for those countries in the margins, right? But even the margins in our own country. Um, and I just, I found that Emily Smith (38:49.696) Yeah. Emily Smith (38:59.509) Yeah. Emily Smith (39:04.64) Right. Ian (39:08.35) Uh, really interesting. I was really grateful that you went that route with that chapter because I thought it was just so important to see. Emily Smith (39:14.696) Right, and I think that that's where our centering is wrong because this story of medical impoverishment, healthcare impoverishment is in the Bible too. You know, the story of the bleeding woman who had spent her last resort was to go to find Jesus because she had spent all of her money for years trying to get care. And then she touches the hem of his garment to try to be incognito and he stops the crowd for her. Like his center. His majority, his view was not the crowd. It was the medically impoverished woman. So there's a chapter about that too, about his majority, how we can make that, how we can visualize the world. I think perhaps like what he looks like. But I get all the time, we just need more resources or Emily, we just need more money type. And I think that's short-sighted. I don't think that's true. I think we have... in the world enough resources and enough money that we need, we just don't have enough equity. And that's money, that's healthcare. We saw that in the pandemic with the lack of oxygen. There's a whole chapter in there on innovation. Yeah, and in India, yeah, when they were running out of oxygen, it's not because the world lacks oxygen. It's because the US and Zack Jackson (40:18.158) Hmm. Ian (40:25.054) Oh yeah, that was very heartbreaking. Oh yeah, that part, yeah, yeah. Emily Smith (40:40.584) stockpiles of it. And so the question innovation is making sure that oxygen is where it needs to be but also asking the harder systemic questions of why wasn't it there in the first place. That the other chapter in that section on courage is on valuing a life you know how do we value it which I think that one was the hardest one to write outside of the cost chapters. Do you remember those about Ebola? Ian (41:09.574) Yeah. Can we go into that a little bit? That, that was very challenging chapter to read too. You're right. Well, it just, and I'm in a butcher, their names, cause I'm getting to it, but I mean, do you mind telling us the story with that? The doctor who died, but then the other one who didn't. And yeah. Emily Smith (41:10.34) Yeah. Emily Smith (41:15.56) Yeah, go ahead. Emily Smith (41:23.488) Yeah. Emily Smith (41:27.524) Mm-hmm. Yes. So the it starts out introducing you to Dr. Khan. And for those of us in public health and global health, we know who Dr. Khan is. He is the Anthony Fauci of Africa. He had also been prior to the 2016 Ebola outbreak that hit his country and you know, West Africa. We all probably remember that epidemic. He had been working with congressmen here in the US, people, legends like Dr. Paul Farmer, who the book is in part dedicated to, to advocate for pandemic or epidemic preparedness for his hospital or resources for something that, could really cripple their system with not a whole lot of fanfare, not much was done with that type of legislation. So I'm trying to set the stage that he is a, very well known and respected doctor. When Ebola hit in his country, he was also frontline, because he's an MD. So he ended up getting Ebola. And this was in his health system that wasn't given the necessary resources to be ready for this epidemic, even though he was advocating for it. So with Ebola without the support of care, you deteriorate very quickly. Ebola is not highly It's highly fatal without the support, but not here in the US, which is why a lot of people or the people that have gotten it and have received care here have not passed away. So he gets it, he gets very sick, he gets transferred to a MSF unit that was specifically made for Ebola, and he keeps deteriorating. So they were having to make a decision on, do we give him what's called ZMAP? Zack Jackson (42:53.355) Hmm. Emily Smith (43:18.428) And at that point, it was an experimental drug for Ebola. It was the only option available for treatment outside of supportive care like IVs and rehydration. I go into a little bit of detail in the book, but I would definitely encourage people to go read that full story by the New York Times article, and that's in the references. But they made a decision not to give him ZMAP. Now, There were only a few vials of that in the world, one of which was actually at that MSF facility or very close by. He was also asked to be medevaced and that was given, a plane did come, but he was so sick, they refused to take him, cause it was not equipped like we see those, you know, the big ones here. So. He ends up dying just a few days later. Without his family, they finally let a friend go in at the end to be with him. If you reverse time a couple of days, there were two other doctors in West Africa, well, one doctor then a nurse that got Ebola too. Same thing, got very sick, deteriorated, had to make a decision of what to do. They were also asked to be medevaced and there was a conversation about ZMAP to be given to them. Both of them received ZMAP. And not only that, they were medevaced in the state of the art, you know, it looks like a sci-fi book airplane, just equipped with every legit thing possible to keep that contained and landed in here in the US. I remember that. I don't know if y'all remember that on the news where full hazmat suits. Ian (45:01.95) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (45:03.778) Yeah. Emily Smith (45:06.844) there's a team of 15, 20 doctors, and they walked out of that hospital a couple days later recovering. I was very intentional in that chapter who I named by name and who I didn't, because the point I was trying to make was if that was my family, I would move heaven and earth to get them medevaced. So I didn't want to dishonor that. Ian (45:14.207) Yeah. Zack Jackson (45:14.608) Hmm. Emily Smith (45:34.46) The question is more at a 30,000 foot level of who is worthy to get ZMAP? Who is worthy to get oxygen? Who is worthy to get medical resources or free healthcare or free education? How do we value a life and how are people's lives valued? Then when you take that to a country level, who gets what from a country? So as a person of faith, I wanted to write a chapter that honored Dr. Khan, but then the bigger questions too of how should we value people if we are believers of, you know, of the Bible or of what Jesus says. So it was a hard chapter to write. I also wanted to, that mission organization of the two people that got medevacked out were part of Samaritan's Purse, and I had been a vocal. I spoke against Franklin Graham's aspect, how he was treating the pandemic very vocally. So everybody knows what I think about that. I also have really good friends that work at Samaritan's Purse. So it's not about the missions agency. It's about some people having friends in very high places with a whole lot of money to help people in need while others don't and asking the question of why. Ian (46:41.255) Mm-hmm. Ian (46:56.823) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (46:59.906) Hmm. Ian (47:00.07) And I love how you bring it back to equity. Cause that, as you said, that's what this is all about. And which again is very tragic, right? But, um, I wanted to shift if I can, there was another thing I just wanted to, there was a quote that I loved is at the end of the chapter on, um, let's see, which one was this broadening our definition of health. When you're talking about the good Samaritan, I just wanted to read it out. Cause I, I just loved it. I read it to my wife. Emily Smith (47:08.468) Right. Emily Smith (47:23.849) Yeah. Zack Jackson (47:24.184) Hmm. Ian (47:30.522) And I just was really happy with this one. But you say blast paragraph, by the way, did the Samaritan tell the man the gospel or preach to him or hand out a tract? The parable doesn't tell us anything like that. I have a hunch Jesus would have mentioned it if it were important to the point he was making at the time, but he didn't. What he modeled for us with, with this story as being a neighbor and word indeed. And I actually was on a zoom meeting with, uh, my priest. It was last Wednesday. So, you know, nine days ago and other lay leaders in our church. And I just was telling them that we were interviewing you and then read that to them because I really part of my struggle is when people the certainty aspect of things that they this is the way we're supposed to behave. Or, you know, it's my way or the highway when it comes to being a person of faith. And I just love that you pointed that out of just there. That's not in there. And you were right. Right. When I read it, I just was like, oh, my gosh, that's yeah. Emily Smith (48:16.905) Yeah. Zack Jackson (48:22.902) Hmm. Ian (48:28.554) Like that's a great lens to take to it. To show that was not the purpose. And I loved that. And I just, oh, absolutely. Yeah. Emily Smith (48:28.821) Yeah. Emily Smith (48:34.272) Right. Well, don't you think he would have put it in there? I mean, Jesus is super duper smart. Yeah, I mean, he's he was very sneaky and intentional with the parables and how he told the stories. So I think he would have let us know that we needed to put a track in there before we gave people health care. But gosh, I mean, unconditional love is not conditional on viewing people as projects or Ian (48:47.68) Yeah. Emily Smith (49:01.196) proselytizing. So I just wanted, especially in the evangelical church, to, you know, we do things with, or we should do things just out of a goodness of heart. Because we're, I mean, it says in the Bible too, when we do these, you do it unto me. When you take care of the poor and feed and clothe, then you take, you do it for him. And so I keep in, I think keeping that perspective, I think we should do more of it in the evangelical church for sure. Zack Jackson (49:31.903) You mentioned the evangelical church. You have a chapter in here called Topics Too Many Evangelicals Don't Want to Talk About. I would expand that to topics that Christians in general don't talk enough about. What sorts of things should we be talking about in our faith communities? Emily Smith (49:38.932) Sure. Emily Smith (49:43.315) Yes. Emily Smith (49:50.2) Yes, I wrote that because when I got back from that UN meeting that I was, I told you about earlier, you know, I'm a pastor's wife and so we get in there for Sunday school and somebody called me a socialist and I did not know, I didn't know how to respond because it caught me so much off guard that wait a minute, I just told you we were talking about like poverty, you know, we can all agree that that's a problem and let's help. So I, it Ian (50:03.441) Mm-hmm. Zack Jackson (50:04.074) Hahaha Emily Smith (50:17.564) it made me realize we need a conversation about what some of these topics are. It also came out of the pandemic, you know, when I would talk about structural violence or systemic racism or Black Lives Matter, climate change, there was such this hubbub of we don't want to talk about it or overtones of we just don't go there. But I think when we hold those to the sky, they reflect heaven So I wanted to make, the whole first part of the book is on that, how to talk about that in non-threatening but challenging ways still. Then that last chapter on making the connections between climate change and poverty and the margins to try to at least let pastors know, talk about it from the pulpit. And here are some ways that you can talk about it where you don't have to scream. You know, you don't have to come across as a crazy liberal if you're in a predominantly Republican Texas type church. But they are holy words because they are equity words. So that's what that chapter is about. Thank you for bringing that up. I chuckled at the title. Ian (51:33.75) Yeah. Zack Jackson (51:34.598) It made me chuckle too as an evangelical who's been, well, former evangelical who's been accused of all kinds of things that, you know, is Jesus taught me, you know. I have a shirt that says, um, cast down the mighty, lift up the oppressed, uh, feed the hungry, send the rich away empty handed. And I often get accused of like Marxism for that. And I say, Emily Smith (51:44.86) Yeah. Right. Ian (51:45.438) Yeah. So then how good. Emily Smith (52:01.236) Oh sure, yeah. Zack Jackson (52:02.294) That's the Magnificat. Mary says that. Hahaha. Emily Smith (52:06.953) Right. Or Jesus' first sermon, you know, when he rolls out the scroll from Isaiah, that is full of captives free and the oppressed and yeah. Yeah. Zack Jackson (52:11.465) Mmm. Zack Jackson (52:16.35) Yeah, good news to the poor. Yeah. Ian (52:18.43) Yeah. So kind of adding to that chapter in particular, you know, the pandemic, you know, there was already lots of divisions in our society, obviously pandemic, I believe made it much worse and more in our face. And so I'm curious, you know, especially as someone who does work with, uh, trying to figure out ways to combat misinformation, science misinformation in particular. Um, Emily Smith (52:33.546) Yeah. Ian (52:46.878) with either from my education lens or just research or work I do. You know, I started when you started seeing the, uh, the increased hesitancy around the vaccine, um, that really started raising a lot of flags for me of like, this is not ending that we're going to see this. This is going to, you know, spread to hesitancies and laws against other vaccines that have made it so that diseases that have been eradicated from our country. solely because of those vaccines, those will come back. Um, and so I'm just curious, you know, the white evangelical community has a lot of power. And so how can one start to have conversations with those communities? You know, I've never been a member, so I know it'd be hard for me, but you were a member and you went through a lot because of what you were trying to do. How, how do we get back in to be able to figure out ways to work with those communities to build that trust again? Emily Smith (53:45.577) Yeah. Ian (53:45.598) Right. And to help them realize that the science is not there to get them. It's not evil. It's trying to save lives. I mean, that's the point. And so how would you recommend we do that? Emily Smith (53:55.209) Yeah. Emily Smith (53:59.884) I wonder if I would recommend something different if I answered this question in five years because I still feel like it's too close. But I think one of the biggest things is knowing who is actually going to have a conversation with you and who is not and having the wisdom to just leave the room or leave a church. Like it's okay. We don't leave a church because we don't like the color of the carpet. You know, I'm not that type of Christian. But Zack Jackson (54:16.215) Hmm. Emily Smith (54:29.668) If there are real equity things and faith issues, I think it is okay to leave a church. So if, I don't know, leave friends, lose friends. I know that's hard when there are kids and youth and some people have to stick with it. If you do stay and you're trying to have these conversations, I would be really careful to guard your heart on what you let in and... what you hear because it can pummel you, which is why I wanted to write some of that cost section so vulnerably. I wish I would have known a little bit more, maybe it wouldn't have been so bad if I would have had some of the wisdom to not go to every fight that I was invited to. So, and there's a chapter on that, on the wisdom of Nehemiah having that type. Yeah, thank you. I would also... Ian (55:18.172) Mm-hmm. Ian (55:21.566) Yeah, I liked that chapter a lot. That's very good. Emily Smith (55:27.56) tell people to be very cognizant, to pay attention to people who are not learning or listening anymore. Because the evangelical church has an incredible amount of power, always have. You know, like faith and prayer at football games where I grew up was still going on in the 90s and 2000s. It's probably still going on. Ten Commandments. And so we think that should be the norm or the centered of everything else when it actually shouldn't. And if somebody can understand why I just said that and why it matters, that's a person who listens. If others just dig in their heels more and we want the good old days, but don't realize those good old days were awful for a wide group of like Black Americans, any immigrants, then we've missed the point. So I think I'm, I don't think I'm answering your question. I think I'm telling people to be careful. Yeah, and also just to, there's this whole notion in the evangelical space that we just need to come together and get along. And that phrase really bothers me because that inherently denotes that there are two sides that need to come together, that both are weighted equally. And in that case, sure, let's come together because that's the center, but. Ian (56:23.878) No, you are. Yeah. Zack Jackson (56:26.402) Yeah. Emily Smith (56:48.84) When you have two sides and one is their voices have had the microphone longer than another side, it's time to equal out that balance where both sides can be heard. And that is still just certainly not going on, especially with science. Zack Jackson (57:00.034) Yeah. Zack Jackson (57:04.766) Right. So it's less about finding the middle point between two things and more thinking about it like a binary star system where the one that is the center of gravity has to do with the relative mass of each one. And so a big star and a small star, the center of gravity is going to be closer to the big star because that's where the mass is. And when we're talking about Emily Smith (57:27.37) Yeah. Zack Jackson (57:31.866) On this side, we have a climatologist, and on this side, we have your uncle on Facebook. Then, the center of gravity is not going to be in the middle of those two things, right? Emily Smith (57:38.636) Sure. Ian (57:41.931) Right. Emily Smith (57:42.948) Yes, or even in, I'm working with some indigenous communities in Brazil and listening a lot longer as a researcher of what their health needs are, including how to overcome them. So talking with traditional healers and valuing and honoring where people's stories are and their needs more than maybe a preconceived idea of what I think it should be. Zack Jackson (58:00.75) Hmm. Ian (58:13.098) Well, we are. Yeah. Well, so I just had a couple of smaller questions if that's all right. Um, and I just appreciate your time really do. But, so I'm curious, especially for you with your expertise, you know, as we reflect back on COVID-19 and this pandemic, um, it's natural for us to think about what we could have done differently. And I'm curious what your thoughts on that, but also too, what can we learn from this to better prepare? Zack Jackson (58:13.266) We're nearing the end. So if you want to. Emily Smith (58:19.584) Good. Ian (58:43.542) for future outbreaks of infectious diseases. Cause I might say another pandemic's gonna happen right away, but there will be outbreaks of infectious diseases. We know that. And so I'm just curious, what are the things that we can learn from this to try to do more preventative measures in the future? Like what would you recommend? Emily Smith (59:03.083) Yeah. recommend starting a conversation on trust in people's expertise instead of feeling like you're the expert on everything, which is a classic American thought. You know, we're very individualistic and so I think that could start, that's very 30,000 foot, but trust the experts. But then finding the community champions within the communities that are speaking from a place of their own. You know, I think that's why part of why I went viral is because I was speaking into my own community. I knew the language. I loved the church. I understood what pastors and their families were going through. So if you can find those and that means, you know, if we have distrust in some sort of science or the vaccines, then find the communities where that distrust is and then find the people there that are the champions. I just think it's a trust, it's a value issue. I know people don't like to hear about the political stuff, but who we vote for matters in very real ways on the ground, and we saw that. So I think having conversations about that too, you know, we are not voters of just one issue. If you are, that is going to trickle to a billion other types of issues. Letting people, especially like my children, I've got a teenager telling her about the importance of who you vote for and why that matters. Ian (01:00:43.958) So is there anything that you want to share? Anything else we should have asked but didn't? Emily Smith (01:00:51.684) No, I mean, I hope if anything for the book, I hope that it makes people laugh. Because there's a lot of stories in there that hopefully are funny. There's really silly pictures from my science fair board. Please go look at that. It's fantastic and a little over the top. But I also hope it... Yes. Zack Jackson (01:01:03.844) I'm going to go. Ian (01:01:06.464) Yes. Ian (01:01:12.402) I think the picture, if I can say the picture that you're staring at, I forgot who you're staring at, but you talk about that you have it. Uh, oh yeah. That picture of the board is great, but then the picture of you staring at somebody and you put, you have that framed on your desk. I, who was that again? I, I couldn't find that again in the book right now. Emily Smith (01:01:21.33) Yes. It's. Emily Smith (01:01:27.222) It's, yes, it's Dr. Tedros. He's the WHO president and I ran into him at the UN and that is my picture of me, like total fan girl moment with him. Yeah. Zack Jackson (01:01:38.382) Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe Ian (01:01:39.851) It was hilarious. And I just, I mean, I'm sure we've all done it. I do that with people all the time, but yours was captured on camera. And I love that you framed it and have put it on your own desk because I just find that hilarious. Like that's just such a wonderful story. Emily Smith (01:01:51.228) Yeah, I have- Emily Smith (01:01:55.372) Well, I have one that's a real one. I mean, they took one where we're both looking at the camera, legit, but I just keep it, because it was how I felt at the time. And... Oh, I'd like to show the card. Oh, thank you. Ian (01:02:05.662) When I love that you shared it with us, like I just, you know, I could totally envision it. And then all of a sudden I see the picture. I'm like, yeah, that's, that's what I was thinking. Like it just, that was really cool. Yeah. Zack Jackson (01:02:07.53) Yeah. Emily Smith (01:02:13.549) Yeah, this is a fangirl. Yeah. So. Zack Jackson (01:02:15.55) Yeah. And a completely honest review for those who are listeners and who hopefully trust the things that we say and do is that this book is really heartfelt. It is fact filled and it is driven by story and your own personal experience instead of just, you know, here's a list of objective facts. And for me, that not only conveys truth. in a way that is easier to digest, but also shows how authentic you are and how important this book is, how much of your own soul is encapsulated in this and how much of your own experience and growth from a young and idealistic nerd who's going to save the world, who gets jaded and cynical, but then finds hope and emerges on the other side stronger and I think all of our listeners should find a copy at your local bookstore or if you have to on Amazon. Or listen to the audiobook which is recorded by you and that must have been a fun experience. Emily Smith (01:03:25.176) Yes, it was fun. It's very hard to do too to just read it harder than expected, but it was fun to do. Ian (01:03:29.703) I'm back. Well, and if I can just add to that, I think that's a great, um, thumbs up there, Zach and recommendation for this book. I can't recommend it enough for people. I think it's an outstanding book. Um, I agree with everything Zach said, but I loved, I just absolutely loved that you couched it in the good Samaritan story. And also in Jesus, the second commandment to us about love, I neighbor as yourself. Um, right. And I just, Reading the whole book. It just the theme was so clear throughout and it was such so beautifully woven throughout the entire book About the importance of loving our neighbors, which is something that I really push for In my class. I have my motto is be curious not judgmental because I'm a huge Ted Lasso fan and really talk about that of how much more we can accomplish by just being curious and I'm Emily Smith (01:04:06.668) Good. Zack Jackson (01:04:21.87) the Emily Smith (01:04:22.093) Sure. Ian (01:04:29.886) Zach will tell you, I'm an insatiably curious person. I'm curious about everything. Um, but I just, I really loved how you really continue to provide more argument on the importance of love in our neighbors and what, and I think this could, this book can change things. I'm, and you can, and I'm really happy that you joined us today. Emily Smith (01:04:42.804) Thank you. Emily Smith (01:04:50.272) Thank you. What a pleasure. We've been circling each other for a while. Um, on trying to- Ian (01:04:56.126) Yeah, because you and I are only a couple of hours apart. I mean, you're in Durham, right? And I'm in Charlotte, so yeah. Emily Smith (01:05:00.204) I know, I know, just pop on down there to UNC is where I got my PhD so I can do both blues. Ian (01:05:07.178) Yeah, my wife went to Chapel Hill. So yeah, yeah. So anyway. Emily Smith (01:05:09.116) Okay, there you go. Lovely. Well, this has been a pleasure. Thank you for the honesty and it being just a kind of a safe space to talk about a book. My first book, yeah. Thank you. Zack Jackson (01:05:22.967) Hmm. Ian (01:05:23.122) Yeah. Yeah, it's really good. I've loved it.

While we are hard at work on the next season, we are re-releasing some of our favorite episodes. This one was our fifth episode way back on September 4th 2019. When we recorded this, we had no idea how the battle for scientific and religious authority would devolve into a battle for our very lives. Should we trust the institutions that created these vaccines? Should we trust our religious leaders who claim to speak for God? Should we trust what the internet has to say about health when we can't even trust it to tell us the truth about the hit 90's cartoon, Street Sharks?    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   Produced by Zack Jackson Music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis PS - Zack's audio did not record properly, so we had to use the backup recording which is why it sounds so bad compared to the others.  Show Notes: Street Sharks and the problem with history: https://www.geek.com/tech/how-i-used-lies-about-a-cartoon-to-prove-history-is-meaningless-on-the-internet-1656188/ The definitive guide to the Denver Airport conspiracy: https://www.denverpost.com/2016/10/31/definitive-guide-to-denver-international-airport-conspiracy-theories/ Hawaii Telescope Project, Long Disputed, Will Begin Construction: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/10/science/hawaii-telescope-tmt-mauna-kea.html The Oven of Akhnai: https://www.sefaria.org/Bava_Metzia.59b.1?ven=William_Davidson_Edition_-_English&lang=bi Note from Zack: After editing the past few episodes, I realized that I've mentioned Thomas Paine at least five or six thousand times. This is because I just finished a massive biography on him, and have had no one to process it with. I do apologize and will henceforth make every effort to diversify my 18th/19th century pop culture references in future episodes. I will leave you with this gem from the October 1783 edition of The Onion... https://www.theonion.com/historical-archives-i-cannot-help-that-women-are-oft-a-1819584502

While we are hard at work on the next season, we are re-releasing some of our favorite episodes. This one originally aired on January 15th, 2020.   ------------   Our Human Origins miniseries keeps rolling as we explore the implications of art, social structures, and burials among Neanderthals and early Homo Sapiens in the Stone Age (specifically about 65,000 BCE to 10,000 BCE). How much can we infer from the clues they left behind? What of the small idols that predate all known religions by 15,000 years? Was God speaking to early humans like God speaks today? Are we making too much out of too little? Why does spirituality always seem to pop up whenever humans are around?    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis  

While we get the next season of DtW ready, we are re-releasing some of our favorite episodes. This one was especially fun.   This episode originally aired on June 16th 2020   --------------   We are thrilled to welcome Dr Scott Sampson to the DtW podcast! Those of you with small children probably know him best as Dr Scott the Paleontologist from Dinosaur Train, but there is so much more to him than time traveling cartoon dinosaurs! In his book, "How to Raise a Wild Child", he explains how he left his dream job in academia and devoted his life to spreading the love of science and nature to the next generation, because unless we become a people who love and understand our world, we're doomed. We get into some of the teaching strategies that he has developed to help all of you parents who suddenly became home-school teachers, as well as practical ways to grow emotionally, mentally, and spiritually. He casts a vision in which humankind rediscovers their love of the natural world, develops technology in tandem with it, and becomes a force for good for the sake of all living things. All that to say, it's no accident that the answers to life, the universe, and everything are contained within episode 42.  Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/ produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 89 Despite the fact that all living things die, most people refuse to talk about it until it directly affects them. That's too bad, because planning for death can make living so much more vibrant. In this episode, we talk about physician assisted dying, guerilla funerals, the importance of ritual, and the nature of life itself.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.       Zack Jackson 00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are   Adam Pryor 00:15 My name is Adam Pryor. I work at Bethany College in Lindsborg Kansas. I hope that when I die, someone will put me in the mushroom burial suit invented by Jim Ray Lee   Ian Binns 00:27 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte. And see I would be cremated and put into the hilt of the first real lightsaber.   Rachael Jackson 00:41 Rachael Jackson Agoudas, Israel congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina, and after I die, I want a traditional Jewish burial. So buried in some sort of decomposing box, I don't really care if it's pine or cardboard. And, yeah, just to be buried in the ground, nothing just simple.   Zack Jackson 01:06 Zack Jackson, UCC pastor and Reading Pennsylvania, and when I die, I want to be composted.   Rachael Jackson 01:13 Kendra Holt-Moore, PhD candidate at Boston University, and when I die, I want half of my body to be pressed into a gemstone that will become an heirloom of my family. And the other half of my body will be buried in one of those tree pods that grows into a forest. I can't remember the name of the person who invented these tree pods. But it's a similar idea, I think, to the mushroom suit, but you become a forest of death.   Adam Pryor 01:44 That is oddly specific.   Zack Jackson 01:48 Yeah, yeah. It's a wonderful story in Greek mythology about that,   Ian Binns 01:52 with the force of a point out that all of you all y'all came up with something? Like somewhat reasonable. I mean, I just wanted to play. How cool would that be, instead of being like, displayed on someone's, you know, mantle in a box, or an urn that can be displayed as a lightsaber hilt?   Zack Jackson 02:14 There you go. Or I can just give my carbon back to the earth that sustained me. Yeah, see, I   Ian Binns 02:20 mean, that's probably what will happen. But I wanted to fantasize   Adam Pryor 02:23 I'm hung up on the gemstones.   Ian Binns 02:26 Okay. Kendrick, Tell us. Tell us about   Zack Jackson 02:29 death. And which, which half of you is going to be a gemstone I want? I'll leave that up to   02:36 the left half.   Adam Pryor 02:37 Is it like? Like, certain parts? Are you? The person chopping you up? I thought they would like, without the ashes. That's not what I envisioned no harm. And how about foot?   Zack Jackson 02:59 That's absolutely the way this has to go. Now. It's like, Don't cremate and turn you into a diamond. Let's just take like your arms or legs and squish them.   Ian Binns 03:08 Yeah, let's just squeeze them all together. You're going to create a gemstone,   Kendra Holt-Moore 03:12 whichever parts would make the best gems.   03:22 Oh, yeah. I guess   Rachael Jackson 03:28 it's as good as it's gonna get. Um, yeah, so we're talking about death today. And there's so much that we could talk about. So let me just say that. I think that death is a pretty fun subject to talk about, mostly because a lot of my own work is about at least implicitly. So it's just so a lot of the stuff that I do comes out of this social psychological theory called terror management theory. And that's terror. Not what people often Yeah, terror. Some people hear me say that and they think I am saying Tara, marriage management theory or like Tarot management theory. But no, it's terror. t e r, r o r, like, you're terrified.   Ian Binns 04:19 I do like to Taro. Sounds kind of cool.   Rachael Jackson 04:24 Yeah, that's a different thing. But terror management theory is a theory that was first proposed in the 80s by a social psychologist, and the whole there's, there's a lot that has been done over the last several decades on it. But the basic idea is that when people are primed to think about death, or they're exposed to some kind of trigger that causes them to reflect on death, and there are explicit and implicit ways of doing this, but basically, these Death triggers or what they would call mortality salience triggers. And they they make us more defensive. And these defense mechanisms can look a lot of different ways. But the basic idea is that like, people don't want to die, whether we're talking about physical death, or even like, a more like metaphorical figurative kind of death. So think, you know, apart from dying in your body, maybe you're also another kind of death would be like, total social isolation and exclusion, that's the kind of like social death. So there's something that is not, we're not just talking about, like physical death, even though that's a huge part of it. But also, you know, a kind of ego death, if you will, where, what it means to be human, the connectedness we feel in community, like there are ways of dying, that disconnect us from those pieces of what it means to be human as well. So anyway, terror management theory is something that touches on all these different kinds of death, and shows how people become more defensive of the things that are meaningful to them, or the things that make us feel like we have a purpose and a sense of significance in the world. And when we don't have those things, those ties of significance, those like foundational building blocks of meaning and community and purpose, that we are a lot more vulnerable to, like psychological dysfunction, and other forms of dysfunction and even death. And so there's, you know, all kinds of ways of, of testing this, but just to give like, one example of what this means is, there was a study years ago, where a group of researchers, they, they took a group of Christians, and they divided the Christians and half and half of the Christians were exposed to some kind of mortality salience, or like death trigger. And usually, that's a couple of questions where you're being asked explicitly to reflect on what you think about death, like what you think will happen to your body when you die, stuff like that. And then the other half of the Christians, were not asked those questions. And then all of the Christians were brought back together and given a series of questionnaires in which they were asked to evaluate an out group, in this case that outgroup was another separate group of Jewish people. And what they found was that the Christian group who had been exposed to the mortality salience trigger, that they had a slightly harsher evaluations against the the Jewish group, than the the half of the Christians that were not exposed to a death trigger. And so this is like, first of all, just say, this has nothing to do with like, like, implicit, like, inherently being like Christian or Jewish, like you could have put in like, Canadian American, like any kind of like identifier. But this goes to show that, like, religion is often a very, like salient and important and strong form of identification for people. But what this showed was that, you know, whenever we're threatened in some way, with these, like ideas of data that we really, we want to like, strengthen our in group markers, and we become a little bit more suspicious of ideas or people or communities that are different from us, or that threaten what we see as like the nature of the universe, the order of the cosmos. And so this is just like one example and hundreds of studies that have been done at this point that that show this idea, and like I said, you could do this with a number of things, but I chose the, the religious example because of, well, what are conversations usually turned to so the point though, is just to say, like, we, as people, we think about death a lot, and we a lot of what we do in our lives, we're trying to like, make, you know, make meaning and like find a sense of belonging in the world, and that death is just like part of being human. And it's something that at some point, we will have to think about more explicitly, and have to really reckon with and so that is just like some background I guess, into like, why this this last episode. In our What is the serious medical ethics? Is that loosely That is correct. But yeah, just to give a little background unto like, how to like orient to this conversation about like the nature of death, the concept of death and how it how it can be a really powerful motivator of, of human behavior. And so, yeah, I guess, like one of the, one of the stories that I was thinking about, and this is sort of transitioning to a slightly different direction than what I was just talking about, but I was thinking a lot about the Death with Dignity movement, this week. And that, for those who don't know, like, there's a lot of, I think, every year, there's still like, ongoing discussion and debate about how this looks in policy. But the state of Oregon was the first state to implement a policy, I can't remember the year, if anyone knows that off the top of their, their head, for Feel free to say, but we can find that later. But they, Oregon was the first state to implement a policy in which people who were terminally ill were are able to ask for a lethal dose of medication to end their lives, so that they don't have to suffer. And that they, you know, the The purpose of this policy was to give terminally ill patients a sense of control, and a sense of, you know, dignity and normalcy in their last days with family. And so the, the story that I had read long ago was a woman named Brittany Maynard, or main art, I'm not sure exactly how to say her name, but she, she died by this voluntary lethal dose of medication on, I think, in 2014. But before that, she had been diagnosed with an aggressive brain cancer, and she was 29. And she and her husband, you know, they were young, and there, they knew that there was nothing that was going to save her. And brain cancer is, you know, just, it's a, like a horrifying thing to go through, and would lead to a lot of suffering and a lot of deterioration in her body and in her, like, mental capability and personality, and she didn't want her family to have to watch her suffer that way. And she didn't want to, sorry, my mind's going on here. And she had didn't want to suffer that way. And so she and her husband established residency in Oregon, so that she could participate in the death with dignity. Act. And so anyway, this, this has led to a lot of conversations, and in a lot of different like religious communities and, and medical communities about like, what this means, like, what are the implications of something like this? And this is just like one example in, in medicine have like, conversations about death. Like, there are other things that, you know, we could talk about, like, defining what death even is, because that has changed over the years as well. But I was thinking a lot about this conversation, because there's something that seems almost like paradoxical I guess about it, you know, and I think that's part of what the controversy brings out is, we feel like, you know, especially many people from religious communities who say, well, all life is sacred, and we should, you know, stand by the sanctity of human life and things like that. And so how does something like the Death with Dignity act, violate that principle, or even, you know, uphold it? And, and so, I just wanted to, like, make that our example and to maybe see, especially like, the clergy in the room, what if, what this has looked like in your communities, if this is something that you've come across, and how that conversation has, has played out? Because when I think about it, I, I think a lot about how, you know, and in, you know, like my academic work, what it means to look at something like the death of dignity, like assisted suicide issue and how that is a way of, like fighting death, or, like, Is it a way of fighting death or giving into death? I think that's sort of the Controversy here and that there's like, a lot of different ways to sort of analyze and interpret what this very personal decision actually means. And it's just so interesting because you, you can, you can really understand it, I think from several different angles, that it, it's like a fight against the suffering and the humiliation that the dying process can bring. So that you, you know, maybe like, remain in your friends and family's memories as a vital, like healthy person. Whereas other people see it as like maybe as a kind of giving up. And it's just like, so it's such a personal issue. And so, so yeah, that's, that's what I wanted to just sort of set on the table to get us get us going.   16:02 These are really great things that you're talking about Kendra. And I will say that I have taught about dignity and death from a Jewish perspective. And I want to throw in a couple couple, you post a couple of dichotomies. And I think there's far more there, there's several others dichotomies as well. And so just want to look at that, when we think about death, dignity in dying, right, which is a better terminology than physician assisted suicide. Right, we're giving somebody dignity? Well, we asked, we have to ask ourselves the questions that in the last 100 years, we have progressed and our medical intervention in such incredible ways that we prolong people's lives. Right, I mean, that's vaccines, antibiotics, surgery, right, just simple things like that, that have prolonged people's life. So from from my perspective, there's really this question of our way of prolonging suffering and the suffering part of life and what part of it right so those those pieces and I, I feel I have to live into the roles that I have set up for myself, and I want to share a story. If that is okay, this comes from comes from Tom but of course, because that's where I like to quote a lot of and everyone wants the full full citation Babylonian Talmud traffic to boat page 104 eight. And this, this will lead into part of the conversation that I was thinking. I made servants of Rabbi Yehuda hanasi went through the roof and said, the upper realms are requesting the presence of Rabbi Yehuda hanasi. And the lower realms are requesting the presence of Rabbi Yehuda hanasi. May it be the will of God that the lower world should impose their will upon the upper worlds. However, when she saw how many times he would enter the bathroom, remove his phylacteries exit, put them back on and how he was suffering so with his intestinal disease, she said, may it be the will of God that the upper world should impose their will upon the lower worlds, and the sages, meanwhile, would not be silent, meaning they would not refrain from begging for mercy so that Rabbi Yehuda hanasi would not die. So she took a jug through it from the roof to the ground. And due to the sudden noise, the sages were momentarily silent and refrain from their begging of mercy. And at that moment, Rabbi Yehuda hanasi died. So we use this and modernity we use this story to say, Who are we doing this for? Who are we prolonging the life and therefore the suffering for? Is it because we can't bear to let this person die? Or is it because that's what is necessary? So that's, that's one way we use this story. The second way we use this understanding is from an ethical standpoint. medical ethics has this idea of personal autonomy, resources, my use of adequate resources and do no harm non maleficence. If a person is clearly suffering, is it not the job of the physician to do no harm? Right? So we really ask we really have to under Stand are we causing harm by allowing someone to live? So having said that, a couple of case questions that I was thinking about, if there is a person who has, you know, the example that Kendra gave, right? So this woman has a brain tumor. Let's say she now develops completely Incidentally, just randomly has nothing to do with the brain tumor, she develops severe bronchitis that turns into aspirational pneumonia. Right? Do you treat the pneumonia? Not rhetorical. Do you treat the pneumonia? Not we're not again, we're not touching the brain. We're not doing anything, do you treat pneumonia?   Ian Binns 20:50 I would still defer to the patient's wishes. I said, if the patient says, Hey, I don't want you to treat my pneumonia, and then argue against that? Well, probably, especially if I've made the decision that I'm going to continue on with my life as long as I possibly can until the cancer finally gets me, then yeah, I would treat it   Zack Jackson 21:20 as a doctor, you do what the patient wants. But if it were me, I don't know if I would, I might see that as a grace. Pender Adam,   Rachael Jackson 21:33 I guess it depends how much time I thought I had left. But I'm inclined to answer I guess similarly to to Zack, that maybe I would if I, if I still had like a good bit of quality of life left. So yeah, I guess I would lean more towards Yes.   Adam Pryor 21:57 I don't have enough information to decide. No, I do like information you have. So no, like. So like, what I think about are the answer I might give to that question look very different when I am 29 versus 39 versus 49. versus 59. It looks really different depending on what my familial situation looks like. And to me, it also looks really different based on the this specific type of brain cancer and its prognosis. So there's, there's a spectrum of I might answer yes or no.   22:44 could go either way. What about you, Rachel? Either way, if I were the patient, in this case, I would not treat the pneumonia.   Ian Binns 22:55 Can you explain why?   22:57 Yeah. If I know I'm going to die soon, right? We're all going to die. But if I know that I'm going to die, and it's going to be a terrible dying experience. I wouldn't want to leave that for anyone including myself. Pneumonia is considered old man's friend. Right?   Zack Jackson 23:19 Right. That's why I mentioned it. I see it as a grace. Yeah, but I would still want it. Not to be cured. But I feel like I would want some kind of comfort, at least in it. Recently drowning   23:33 you aren't? Yeah, you I mean, that's the difference, right? You can cure most people. I shouldn't say most times, pneumonia has the ability to be cured. Right. It's not an automatic death sentence if you get pneumonia, but there are plenty of symptom relief things that you can also take, you know, also just like, have enough morphine that you don't care for feel any of it. I bring this up because there are real life examples. Right there real life, right? There's a there's a response that that we look at responses, the Jewish way of saying, Hey, I have this question that doesn't actually have an answer. Hey, rabbis, can you give me an answer, where it talks about a 95 year old woman who has Alzheimer's, severe, severe Alzheimer's? And they compare that to a 16 month old who has severe cannabis disease? Right, both of them will die within the year. What do you do with them? Does their happiness matter does how long they live matter? What matters when we make these decisions? And who is making these decisions? Right in the case that Kendra provided for the death and dignity, the patient themselves is making the call. Oftentimes, when we are faced with questions like this, the patient themselves is not the one capable of making that call, for one reason or another again, in terms of the death, they did In Oregon and Washington, Oregon, I just looked at my notes that was 97. Washington was oh nine. So both those two states habit, and in those cases, the patient themselves must be the one it cannot be a guardian. And there's lots of doctors involved and psychologists and it has to be a hospice situation of six months or less verified by multiple doctors. I mean, it's really above board. This is not the 1990s Kevorkian questions, which is a different question entirely. But I know that that's clouded. Those of us that remember those years very differently than these laws in Washington and Oregon, Washington State and Oregon? Um, I think it's, I think it's all of those pieces. And then when we look at the question of what are we doing for prolonging life, if someone you know, what is death? And I so let me just answer that real quickly. I know I'm jumping all around. And for our listeners, I apologize that I'm just sort of chunking my statements here, I unfortunately will have will have to exit and leave this wonderful conversation. So I just want to put in a couple more thoughts.   Zack Jackson 26:08 Without Rachel, it's gonna turn dark,   26:10 it's gonna get dark, it might turn it gets dark. So I'll have to listen to your statements when they come out, then.   26:22 Um, what what do we classify as death A long time ago, it was when you stopped breathing, and then it became when you stopped having a heartbeat. And then it's when your brain ceases to have brainwaves. Right. And that's where that's where we're at now, is brainwave death. So if your heart is still beating, your body is technically living alive. But your brain is not and cannot be, we don't have a way to resurrect that. So what do we understand death to be. And this is where I see hope in our society. This is where I'm hoping we will get to go that rather than asking these questions of being that we're removing the sanctity of life, we're redefining what life can be. So here's the optimism that you're just going to have to hold on to for just a little bit, because I can't, I can't end the episode this way, because I'm not going to be there. But it's optimism that rather than being afraid of death, which is what so much of our society is dealing with. And as a clergy person facing one's mortality is a question that we face a lot. And I know other third year the same way, and recognizing that, you know, bring on the Lion King, it's the circle of life, it's the circle of life where we're really looking at life, and that death is just a part of that. So getting down and drilling down, what are the things that we're afraid of, and it's, it's often a fear of difficulty and dying, or it's often a fear of an afterlife for some people. So that's not which it's not just death that we're afraid of, in our society with all these medical techniques, we have the ability to, to say, Okay, now we have the control. Right, we have the ability to Yeah, how are we using that control? How are we taking ownership of ourselves and our life, which includes this portion of?   28:27 So that's all for me.   28:33 Good luck.   Zack Jackson 28:55 I'll jump on the religious aspect, because the United Church of Christ actually has made Yeah, you have statements about this topic? Because of course, we have   Ian Binns 29:09 a lot of topics. That's not a complaint.   Zack Jackson 29:15 No. And you know why we do that is because the United Church of Christ is a congregational denomination, which means that the national setting has no power to enforce anything on local churches. So when we get together every other year for General Synod and we make these grand statements of, of witness and whatnot, there's no actual accountability that has to come with that. We can just say these things and then send it to a committee to make a study on it and send out materials to churches. And so unlike other denominations, where when they say something, they actually have to do something about it, we can just say a lot of things. So that's kind of nice, but we did in 2007 have For a resolution on the sea, the resolution was called legalization of physician aid in dying. And as a result of that, they, they voted in to affirm this, which sent it to a committee to do research on the topic and to create a six week study guide for small groups and churches. It was designed to be used during Lent, which is the time in which traditionally, we imagine ourselves in the tomb with Christ. And looking forward to resurrection. And so it's very theologically focused. I will put a link in, in in the show notes. But, you know, one of the things that it really focuses on is that Christians should not be afraid of death, death, and resurrection is kind of our thing. Like, it's, it's an important part of the Christian tradition and story. And so if we believe that death is not a final thing, but a transition into something else, then how one's life ends, his lesson is not all that important. And so whether that person dies by natural causes or dies, in physician assisted ways, the it is still a transition into into what is next. And we believe that people are more than just their physical bodies. And so keeping a physical body alive is not inherently more virtuous than allowing a physical body to die. And so we came down on the side of supporting, but also in an informed way.   Rachael Jackson 31:58 Zach, just to get out of like a clarifying question, maybe, because I think what a lot of what we've been talking about is, you know, the policies and statements that are for this kind of, you know, choice in deliberating like how someone wants to die, but just in case, there's any confusion for people who didn't like grow up in, in a community where there was a lot of opposition to this. I just wanted to, like, put out there some of the ways that people have been thinking about, like, aid and dying, and, and I personally didn't grow up with a ton of conversation around this. So I'll just say, like, from, from what I understand, like some of the verses, I guess, that were, that could be used to, like, deny someone the ability to have, like their own, like authority in determining when they could die if they were terminally ill, or versus, like one in or several, I guess, in the New Testament, but I'll just read one, which is in First Corinthians 316 through 17. And it says, Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you, if anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him, for God's temple is holy, and you are that temple. And so it's like, versus like that, that I have these vague memories of people sort of using that as like, the theological argument of like, Well, someone shouldn't have should, someone shouldn't be able to make the decision to die before their time. Because, you know, like, the idea that your body is not your own, and that you just have to, like live until, like, God decides that it's not your time anymore. And so that's, that's, that's my memory of like that how that discussion went, but I like it. What else is there Zack? I feel like you probably have more like experiences and memories of how people have maybe argued this does that sound pretty? Pretty right to you? It does.   Zack Jackson 34:27 I was taught as a kid that taking any human life is a sin. And so taking your own human life is a sin. And because you took the life and then died with that sin, having not the opportunity to repent from it, then anyone who took their own life whether in this setting or in you know any other way would end up in hell was what I was taught in no uncertain terms. Yeah, which I think I've mentioned in a previous episode before, that my mom's explanation to me was that anyone who takes their own life, their brain typically has some issues going on. And God would see that in the same way that God would see the brain of someone with down syndrome who doesn't have the mental capacity to understand the ancient Creed's or, like, something like that. And it's also, as I reflect back now, I think about how those same people who would tell me that taking a life is a sin. Also found ways of getting around it when it was the death penalty or war. They found ways of theologically explaining those things, but not typically suicide, whether physician assisted or otherwise, or abortion, those were the two that were like, there's no way around that. But war and death penalty, they often found theological ways around it. And that's usually what we do, isn't it? when we, when our worldview supports something, we find a way of making our theology support it.   Ian Binns 36:15 So we cherry pick? Yeah, this this part supports my my conclusion. So I'm going to love this part, even if many other parts don't support it, I'll ignore this. Yeah, and I think that   Rachael Jackson 36:30 what you just said back to like that, that also resonates are I remember, some of my, like early conversations, saying that exact thing like about people going to hell when they make that decision. And I think what is what was always absent from those conversations, though, those like theological interpretations, it seemed like there was a conflation of all the circumstances in which someone might choose to, like, take their life. And obviously, it's like a super sensitive subject and really complicated, but I think that, like, a lot of what we've been talking about here, right now is, you know, the idea that, like, we're talking about a reduction in suffering, or like the attempt to reduce suffering and, like, focus on like, quality of life, rather than quantity of life. Which, you know, still still tricky, still controversial, but that that's really, I think, the core of what people are are thinking about when they like support something like the Death with Dignity act, and it's, it's, I think it does in in a lot of cases come down to are you are you emphasizing quality, or quantity? And it's not always easy to like separate those things out but that's where I see the difference and maybe like the the core of some of the disagreements about like whether this is a good thing.   Zack Jackson 38:11 I think I would be really interested in hearing different points of view based on profession. Yeah. Cuz I think a couple of years ago, this whole topic would have made me very uncomfortable. But I'm death is just such a part of my life. As a pastor of a primarily older congregation. All all day, all week all year, I'm, I'm with the dead and the dying and it has lost its staying. death itself is no longer something that really terrifies me. It's it's become this kind of more beautiful part of being alive. This transition that it's hard to explain, because then it makes you sound callous, and a little dead inside. But I think it's one of the most beautiful experiences when I can be present with someone at the end of their life. It is this holy and sacred thin space when somebody is breathing their last breaths. So I'm not afraid of it anymore. You know? Plus, I live with a pastor who used to be a hospice chaplain. So like, we talk about death around the dining room table.   Rachael Jackson 39:34 Just your everyday dinner conversation.   Zack Jackson 39:38 Yeah, so I almost kind of like the idea of getting to choose when you go because then you're not, then you're not worrying about the process of dying. Adam. Oh,   Adam Pryor 39:51 Zach, what you mean like death became a part of life. You said that, which is only interesting to me because Rachel said it too. Is that? Yeah, exactly. That's exactly what I'm after.   Zack Jackson 40:07 All right, so. So I did a CPE, which is clinical pastoral education at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia. And my very first day, I was training with one of the chaplains, I walked into a room, because she had given called in, and the woman had died. Just maybe 15 minutes before we got there. And I didn't know that. And I'm standing in the room, and somebody mentions that she's dead. And I looked over at this person laying there that could have just been sleeping. But then suddenly, I was aware that this person had died. And I felt so weird. And I felt so creepy because this person wasn't prepared and dressed up and you know, the whole, like, Oh, they look just like they're, they look so good. The way you do it a viewing. This is a person that was still hooked up to machines and looked pretty bad, and was dead. And it was horrifying. And there's a certain smell that comes with death. And I thought about that for days and weeks. And then I just kept going and doing it. And as a chaplain being called when people were at the end, and sitting down with people, and you kind of I don't know, you do a scary thing a couple of times, and you get through it, and it's not as scary. And then once you're less afraid, you start to notice the more holy aspects of it. You know, for example, when a person is dying, and they know that they're dying, and they have disavowed themselves have the this mythology that they will live forever, and they know that the end is near, do you know the kinds of conversations you can have with a person in that state? They are the most honest conversations that that person has ever had in their life. And to be able to just speak openly about like, what do you think it's gonna be like, later on? Today? Maybe even? What do you think? those spaces, those conversations, it's almost like talking with an astronaut before they they go off into the great expanse, you know, you're, you're about to go see something that I'm not gonna see for a long time. And I want to talk with you about how you're feeling about it. And so I do this, and I've done this for years. And yeah, this is why most pastors were telling me they prefer funerals to weddings. There's less drama, and there's way more honesty, and it's a much more sacred and holy place that, that thin space at the end of life.   Adam Pryor 42:51 So I mean, I'm kind of sad, Rachel is not here, because I think it's like, probably the like place where like, we were gonna line up more than she would want to give credit for. I mean, I'll still still poke at her. But especially cuz she's not here to defend herself. But I'm an academic, that's what we do. So what I'm thinking about Zach is like, I think this language that both you and Rachel use, I think it comes from a very, like, pastoral. I mean, that in the broad sense, right, a sense of care place, to delimit to expose a place of scientific overreach, I don't think is like what we would describe it as doing, but I think it's implicitly what, what's happening, right? Which is, in a sciency way, right? Life is not dead. How do you define life? It's the persistence of not dying. Right? And if life is taken as that it's terrifying to die. But that's a very, I think, particularly in the 20th 21st century, right? Like, that's a very scientific way of getting at this right. It's this sense of saying, science has described for me, the ways in which something is living. Right, called biology. And, and what I think like, what I think is interesting, is that the pastoral approach that I think both you and Rachel want to take, wants to put the brakes on that for a second and say, hold up. what we think of as living might not line up directly with a definition Have the mechanics of a body or thing, trying to continually self perpetuate itself. And, on the one hand those sound like, like, Okay, so that's how religion is going to do this. And on the other hand, there are these sciency things that you can do, which are great. And, you know, sometimes great, and sometimes we should use them. And sometimes we shouldn't, but, but I think what, what I would push on is that, I think how we decide when to use and when not to use those medical and scientific interventions, lines up with, not how we think about death. But how we've defined life. Like, by bringing death into a part of life, right, you've reframed the conversation in a way that you can't, in the scientific context, because for somebody to be dead, be fundamentally not to be alive. Right, whereas that binary gets broken down. If you make death part of life.   Zack Jackson 46:27 at its best, one of the things that religion is supposed to do is to suppress the ego. And a person. Religion is a way of connecting a person to something larger than themselves. And one of the ways that my personal religion my faith does that is through knowing how interconnected that I am, that I mean, in my faith, I'll call that the Holy Spirit. I will also from my, you know, scientifically, I'll talk talk about the the atoms and molecules in my body, that are constantly being introduced and sent back out and you know, re forming and fighting back against entropy in order to create this thing. But that, you know, stars exploded A long time ago. And those those star pieces made this, and they made countless other living creatures before me, and they will make so many more after me. And so the me I see as a we, I don't, I'm not so worried about the death of my ego, because my religion has helped me to kill most of it anyway. And so, you know, people talk about having leaving a legacy, how will people remember me? How will I be remembered, they build these pyramids in the desert, because they want to be remembered, the ego has to live on well afterwards, which completely misses the entire point of the interconnectedness of the universe, and just the miracle of life, you know, Carl Sagan said that we are a way for the universe to know itself. And I love that I think that's has such, so spiritually profound. Those, those atoms that were created in those supernova are now able to know themselves because of this brief instance that we call Zack Jackson. And I love that, and I, so I think of death. And this is why I said at the beginning, that when I die, I want to be composted. Because I, when you cremate someone, you'll lose a lot of a lot of that organic material to the combustion. When you bury someone in a, like, traditionally, you know, you don't give back and I want 100% of, of what I am to go back, because I want it to live on as it lived on before me.   Rachael Jackson 49:13 And when you're pressed into a gemstone, similarly, you also live on   Zack Jackson 49:19 100%. I mean,   Adam Pryor 49:24 I think I mean, there's no segue from pressing people's bodies into gemstones that I can that I can make. I so yeah. I I'm also thinking about the question that Rachel asked Dan. And like, where that falls into this and like how I would think about it, and to not give the like snarky I need more information answer. Like Well, I I'm gonna stick with my snarky, like, I need more information, but not in the like, not in the sense of like, Okay. In an almost snarky or sense, don't worry, I'm gonna go, I'm gonna go deeper, which is to say like, even if you gave me the information, okay, I don't know if I could answer the question one for anyone but myself. And two. For me this sort of like I, I'm very sympathetic to this idea that that like death is part of life right to overcome that dichotomy, right and that it has this, that making that movement and using religious traditions to make that movement de centers as in really, really important ways. So, I am 100%, on board there, it still leaves me with a big, long polling question, right, which is almost I think, harder, which is then to say, like, we will, but then how do you define that living thing? Like, how do you find that living thing that can be subject to death? And now, it's not just living by being a proxy of not being dead? Like, that's the question that that for me, comes immediately after the very pastoral movement that I heard you and Rachel making. And I mean, I think it's exciting because I don't think there are great answers to it. But also, I would take a stab at answering it, which is, I think what makes Rachel's predicament so difficult to deal with. So, I, I would play a language game, unsurprisingly. Right. Which is to say that we when we when we say something is living, or what it means to live, right, we can meet it in two senses, grammatically, and in transitive and a transitive sense. So we can mean it as something is alive. Right? as a state of situation, or we can mean it as the experience of living. Right? So that it's this this lived experience that one has not a state of being something, right. So it has these two senses when we use it. And for me, I think it's getting in to and being cognizant and about that sense of the lived experience, that's really important. Can I identify a set of experiences that living stuff house, that's essential to how I would think about whether or not I'm not actually ending my life is that 29 year old with the brain tumor who now has pneumonia. But as the 29 year old with a brain tumor, who's now got pneumonia, was I already dead? Because I had ceased to do the things by which I would constitute having living experience. So I'm not actually dying. And doing that no one's assisting me in dying, I was already dead. Even everybody that looks around me says, aha, you're alive because you have a heartbeat, or brain function, or this or that other thing. I mean, don't get me wrong, I know this goes down like a, an ethical, good. gray area might not be the right description, ethical terror, then that that can result. But I do think it's really I think it's really important to shapes the way that I think about life in what it means to live in really, really critical ways. I'm so sorry. Now I'm monologuing. Right? But like my, my bit here would be to say like, my cheeky answer of like, I need more information. Is that like, when Rachel puts that scenario forward? What I think about is me at 29. And at 29. I've got a three year old kid. And there are a vast number of things that I desire to have in relationship to the people who are in my life at 29 that says, Hell no, go treat that pneumonia. But I can also imagine a 29 year old for whom those desires for relationships which would be really critical to how I would define life are really gone. And then the pneumonia is, is the friend that makes a death that is already realized for that person available to everyone else to mourn?   Rachael Jackson 55:11 Yeah, I see a lot of what you're saying, Adam, as relevant to, like, the way that we kind of started and talking about, like, what, what are these different kinds of deaths and that we have, understandably, like an over emphasis maybe on like, the physical death. Because, you know, that's like, our physical bodies are a threat everyone, like sees and experiences immediately and, you know, I guess it's like, easier to make policies that affect those physical.   Adam Pryor 55:53 Like, I can measure the thing that I just,   Rachael Jackson 55:55 exactly. And that's what it like, the the scientific piece is, um, you know, it's far from simple, but it is simpler. And some cases, when you're dealing with, like, the physical stuff, but that there is, you know, we can talk about social death, or whatever other kind of death, but I think like, what you were just elaborating is, like, what I would call a social death of being totally disconnected, having like, no support system and no drive or capacity to be connected to a community or to a support system. And, you know, I get that that can like sound a little dramatic, I guess, to say, like, you're socially dead if you don't have those things. But, I mean, there's no, there's no denying that that makes an impact on people's lives, and all sorts of measurable ways that like social science has been measuring for, you know, many, many decades. And so that there's something about that feels really intuitive to me, even though, yeah, like you said, there's also like all kinds of other ethical conundrums that come up. But also,   Adam Pryor 57:13 let me just say, I mean, I'm cheating. I did write part of my dissertation on like, phenomenologies of life and death. So like, it's not like I just like came out with this quickly, like, I mean, I've been thinking about it for a decade. So yeah, I just, I feel like I should I want to do research,   Ian Binns 57:39 that I should all do research. I don't really wish you'd come up with these answers totally on the fly. So I'm gonna have to just dismiss everything you said?   Zack Jackson 57:49 Well, I learned all of my lessons about death from the school of hard knocks out on the front lines.   Adam Pryor 57:57 I mean, I will say too, though, I, I do think about it in personal ways, right? Like by my mother has pretty severe dementia. Right? Which has an interesting place within how people talk about death with dignity, right? It doesn't fit the legalistic framework that's been set up for like the Death with Dignity movement. And I think that's, its mean, a sound super cold. And I don't mean it that way. But it's like, in some ways, sort of interesting to see the ways in which working with a person who loses mental faculties illustrates the ways in which one's life is not one's own.   Ian Binns 58:47 Well, what is the difference? I feel like I know the answer to this, but the difference between death with dignity and a living will   Zack Jackson 58:55 a living well just says what you want to happen to you.   Ian Binns 59:00 Right? So you know, if you're,   Zack Jackson 59:03 if you're in a state where that sort of thing is legal, then you could put that in your living well,   Ian Binns 59:09 right. Well, you make that but I mean, if you're in a situation like that's where you write down, you don't want any extraordinary measures are taken that kind of stuff.   Zack Jackson 59:18 Right? Which listener if you don't have a living will, it's not hard to do and you should, you should definitely do it. My wife and I both have it you never know. You never know and it is always better for the people who are trying to take care of you if they know your wishes ahead of time and then every hospital   Adam Pryor 59:35 chaplain will thank you Yep.   Ian Binns 59:38 In my having written down Yes, every hospital chaplain will take you haven't officially written down and a living will takes away all those questions.   Zack Jackson 59:48 Write and right let it let everyone know what you want for your funeral for my mom has been making a playlist for her funeral for years, which includes Zombie by the cranberries which I told her is in bad taste   Adam Pryor 1:00:07 that decision   Zack Jackson 1:00:14 Yes, she at one point wanted time if your life by green days she was going through something in the 90s until I told her that the name of the song is actually good riddance. And then time of your life, it's a tongue in cheek song. Despite the fact that every single graduating class in the late 90s, early 2000s used it in their graduation. It is not what you think when you talk   Ian Binns 1:00:39 about like, for some reason, maybe think about this. But Did you all hear the story of the Irish man who died in 2019? And he set it up so that when his casket was being lowered into the grave, he had recorded himself? Oh, he was a prankster. As it's going down, all sudden, you hear his voice being like, hey,   Adam Pryor 1:01:06 let me out. Let me Oh, stuff like that. That they put out, right? Yeah. The soul Bell like, you know, because sometimes they got it wrong. You weren't really bad, or people were afraid that they got it wrong, or that you weren't really dead. So you could ring a bell and they would open the casket real quick. And you know, usually that was gross.   Rachael Jackson 1:01:25 Yeah, no, that is terrifying. Which is why if you get pressed into a gemstone and then have the rest of your body buried as Dustin of death, you can, you don't have to worry about that.   Zack Jackson 1:01:39 This is the reason why Thomas the campus is not a saint, despite the fact that he wrote the second best selling Christian book of all time, the imitation of Christ, when they zoomed his body, they found claw marks on the top of the coffin because he had been buried alive and they said a real saint would have just accepted his debt instead of fighting it. And so they never canonized him, which is Bs, which is why I think I call him a saint when I when I think about my bookie and that's all that matters, right? Oh, boy.   Ian Binns 1:02:13 So yes, dear listener, if we don't have in our notes, look it up Irishman pranks his family funeral, it was hilarious to watch. But the thing is that everyone expected it. Yeah. Okay, so first read it. They all tell everyone to do stuff like that. If you don't know, I don't think. I don't think he told them that he was gonna do that. I think maybe if you knew, but at least they knew he was a prankster. Right? And tell the funeral director telling jokes. And oh my gosh, it's so funny. To see all those people just chuckling. So, yeah, I think I'm gonna put some like that. So everyone   Zack Jackson 1:02:58 wants that everyone wants people to laugh at their funeral. Everyone I've ever talked to about this, they always go, I don't want people to cry and be sad at my service. I want people to be happy and tell stories and laugh. And every single person said this, I always tell them, do you think there's anyone out there who wants their loved ones to cry? No. But we're going to, because we're going to miss you. You're not going to be there. So you really don't get a say in this. And I'm going to cry at your funeral. And there's nothing you can do to stop me. And if you want to haunt me, go ahead. I'd actually kind of like that, I think, at least for a little while. Don't do anything weird and creepy. So like, my grandma told me, she doesn't want to serve us because she doesn't want people crying. And I said, I don't care, grandma. And she looked at me and she was like, might you wait, no, this is what I want. And I said, I don't care, because you're not going to be here. And these services are for the living and not for the dead. And there have been too many times people didn't want to burden someone else by you know, they don't want them to be sad, and then they don't get closure. So I'm all for respecting people's wills and wishes and all of that. But I am not above throwing a gorilla funeral service. When I need to   Ian Binns 1:04:13 fly I want to be I like in the various cultures around the world that treat it more as a celebration of life. Where they still have the moment and the funeral or somewhere where it is sad and things like that. But that it is a I remember, when I was a Peace Corps volunteer in Jamaica, that was what they were. Someone was explaining to me it's it's a celebration of that person's life.   Zack Jackson 1:04:32 I learned recently that Church, The Orthodox Church has an annual Feast on the day of a person's death for the first couple of years. So you get your family back together. You have a big meal and you share stories of that person on the anniversary of their death. And I think that's   Rachael Jackson 1:04:48 spectacular here. The dead one that's a great opportunity to hot people.   Adam Pryor 1:04:54 Absolutely. So efficient and catterall. There. That's what everybody longs for.   Zack Jackson 1:05:03 Just get them all in one place takes a lot of energy to haunt Adam.   Ian Binns 1:05:08 Yeah, I will have to say, Zack that I do feel like this conversation was probably a little bit more uplifting than the conversation about middle age,   Zack Jackson 1:05:21 which is hilarious, right? And a part of that, I think is because I wasn't there. I   Ian Binns 1:05:25 feel I feel happier. After this one than I did the last one,   Zack Jackson 1:05:30 the middle aged conversation was about the fear of death. And this one is about the acceptance of accepted it. It's great.   Kendra Holt-Moore 1:05:41 Yeah, I was gonna, I was gonna end with a quote that was gonna bring us back down. But I guess I'll just leave that off. Because I feel like we're in a good place. Oh, God, go   Ian Binns 1:05:49 ahead. Go ahead. Bring it No, I   Kendra Holt-Moore 1:05:50 don't know that it fits. It also takes us back to like terror management theory, which we've kind of not really been talking about. So this is good.   Zack Jackson 1:06:00 Okay, well, we can end our series with an announcement then, that this is the last episode in this mini series, which will bring us to, I think just about our two year anniversary. And so in celebration of that, and also because we have a whole bunch of professors that are going to be doing a lot of transitioning in this period, and a rabbi who will be entering into high holy days, and me who's just doing stuff. We're gonna we're gonna put up some of our favorite episodes from the first two years. And so if you missed them, or if you just want to listen to him again, because I've been listening to some of the older episodes, and there's some they're made of Kendra in there. And then after that, when we're gonna What's that? Yeah, they're made Oh, cuz they're gem gems. Ah, that was a call back I gotcha. Very well played. So when we come back from that, we've got a whole slate of new interviews and a new format for the show that will focus around storytelling, and a variety of new segments, which we're excited to bring you, which may or may not include books we've read or demons that we've loved or dead Christians. We want to tell fun stories about   Rachael Jackson 1:07:29 and listener questions gonna leave you   Zack Jackson 1:07:31 with that and listener questions. Oh, yeah, that's the important one. So we've got a lot in store for year three, and we're excited to bring it to you. gonna end it with that.

Episode 88 Our exploration of medical issues along the span of our lives has reached the middle age. That strange period of time whose goalposts are constantly shifting because the people on the lower end don't want to admit it's beginning and those on the other end, don't want to admit it's over. This period is marked by an awareness of our body's limitations and our stubborn refusal to get that weird new ache checked out by a doctor. It can be a time of self-realization, honest introspection, and spiritual awakening or it could also mean a new sportscar and expensive vices. People do funny things when they start to discover hairs in places they're not supposed to be!    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    Transcript  This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.   Rachael Jackson  00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are Ian Binns  00:17 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte. And if I were to pursue a midlife crisis, the first thing that hit my head was is I would get tattoos. My name is Adam Pryor, Adam Pryor  00:29 I work at Bethany college. If I were to live out one of my midlife crisis fantasies, it would be to send all of my children to boarding school and buy myself a convertible. Kendra Holt-Moore  00:48 Kendra Holt-Moore, PhD candidate at Boston University, and my midlife crisis would either be get an eyebrow piercing, or get really involved in local theater, and just audition for all the main characters and try to achieve small town fame. Rachael Jackson  01:08 Hi, this is Rachael Jackson, Rabbi at Agoudas, Israel congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina. And if there were a midlife crisis that I would fulfill, I think it would be going off the grid entirely, and just becoming a hermit with my cross stitch stuff, and just sitting there and stabbing fabric for hours on end. Adam Pryor  01:36 So, as the as the question has been to indicate today, we are talking about health care, and particularly the issues of middle age, which is sort of the least exciting period of healthcare is what I've decided, right? No, no violent birth or death, just the long stetic period where everything is supposed to be humming along like normal, and yet you feel worse about yourself every day. Rachael Jackson  02:05 This is totally a year episode. Exactly. Adam Pryor  02:11 does feel like I was built for this. So but it's interesting, right click, because it's hard to find a lot of information about issues in the middle of life, because ideally, things are sort of going along pretty normally. And so there are a couple of things that I found that I thought were really interesting. So most of the material that you find talking about healthy aging, particularly during this period, relates to mental health more than it does physical health. The second thing that I found that I thought was interesting was that folks who tend to be in middle age seem not to go to doctors. They're maybe even worse than their own children who don't want to go to the doctor, but you make them go. But then when you hit this long middle period, you suddenly stop going as regularly. So I have another confessional question for you. I'm just curious when the last time you went to a doctor was Rachael Jackson  03:07 I went to my GP in December. Adam Pryor  03:11 recognize my stats here? Ian Binns  03:14 Yeah, I went 10 to 10 days ago. Sorry. Adam Pryor  03:20 You guys are by representative sample in any way, shape, or form? Not Ian Binns  03:24 at all, because the moment you told us before we started recording that that's what the data tells us. I knew immediately. I'm throwing that out. Yeah. Because I've always been the if I got some wrong and call the doctor. Adam Pryor  03:36 Do you really? Rachael Jackson  03:38 Yeah, I'm the opposite of that. No, I'm the I only got a baseline kind of person. So that's why I went because I I was turning 40 this year. And because health insurance is stupid. It worked out better that I went in December of last year rather than wait until I officially turned 40 this March. So I went last December so I could get a baseline of Okay, this is what I am at 40. Plus it was a pandemic year. So I was super stressed. So what was what did I look like in a super stressed 40 year olds is kind of what why I went I won't be going this year. Kendra Holt-Moore  04:20 I don't have a GP. But I have been a graduate student with my health insurance through Boston University. So I would just go to Student Health Services, and then they might tell me to go somewhere else. So I guess that kind of counts as a GP services, Rachael Jackson  04:41 but you're also technically just just throwing that one out there. You're not also technically middle aged, Adam Pryor  04:45 correct? Yes, correct. Right. Kendra Holt-Moore  04:48 Throw in my throw in my experience there. I do try to avoid the doctor until something urgent happened. See, so and I have been in the last year Ian Binns  05:00 I have had some unusual medical things happen to me over the last 10 to 15 years, that that's another reason why I'm like, you know what something's going on. And I'm kind of like, I'm not really sure about this out. Now what I do is I send them a message to the online system and say, Hey, this is happening. thoughts. And if they want me to come in, I come in, just because, you know, but the running joke when I had that weird infection in my hand that hospitalized me for two days and led to two surgeries, you know, and would have killed me if I had not gone in all the guys I work out with said, Hey, man, it's really good euro was because if it happened, any of us we would have been dead. I was like, exactly. Explaining, you have no idea how much my finger hurt, and they just like did just know, your finger. Does not matter. So yeah, because I went in is a reason why I didn't have to have anything amputated and or end up dying. So you know. Adam Pryor  06:07 So worth the check. So it was worth the check. Absolutely. Ian Binns  06:14 And I've had kidney stones several times. So yeah, when stuff happens, I'm just like, yeah, that's what they're there for. I also I'm under that, I think, mindset because growing up on a military facility in Germany, and even though my parents were divorce, I was still under my dad's medical insurance as a retiree. And so there was never a costs associated with going, you know, our my insurance was, I was fully covered with everything. And when you have something wrong, you just went in, I remember the first time I had to go to the doctor, I was in college, and they asked me about the copay, I just kind of looked at what was he talking about. And it was actually I didn't even know where to go first. Because there was no urgent care. For the most part, it was if he had something wrong, you know, on the military facilities, at least at the time, it was more of like, here's the ER, here's this kind of stuff. And that's where you went. And I remember kind of suggesting that someone and they're just like, what do you know, you don't go to the RFA, you go to urgent care. I didn't know what it was. So yeah, it was big, you know, wake up call. And as Rachel said, insurance is ridiculous. Adam Pryor  07:27 Yeah, I feel like the insurance piece is the like, largest factor of health care and middle age. Like, I, cuz I don't know about you. But anyway, it will everywhere. But but in particular in middle age, because I feel like you're you're kind of healthy enough to sort of roll along, if you so choose. But also, you start to get aware that like, probably somebody should, you know, take a look under the hood and make sure everything's okay. It's like when your car hits 100,000 miles, right, there are just some things you probably shouldn't do. And you also go, I really don't want to, because I know how much this will cost. Maybe not everybody feels that way. I certainly feel that way. Every time my wife looks at me and says you should go to doctor. And I say no, because I'm just too cheap. Rachael Jackson  08:20 Right? No, I think I think you're absolutely right. That it's it's partly our system. So it'd be interesting to see, because you were you were our anecdotal evidence or our anecdotal stories kind of disproved your scholarship article that you were saying that, you know, people have this general age Don't. Don't go. So I'm wondering if if it is a health insurance thing? What about countries that have universal health care if they experienced the same sort of dip in activity at this particular age range? Adam Pryor  08:56 Yeah, importantly, they don't. This is a distinctly and Rachael Jackson  09:00 they know that. Great. Adam Pryor  09:02 Yes. The World Health Organization has looked at that significantly, right. In terms of talking about what, what happens when you provide universal access to health care. Right. And I think it's interesting, right, because like, in some ways, all three of us, I'm going to explode you Kendrick cuz you're not middle aged yet. But the three of us who want Rachael Jackson  09:25 to be associated with you, people. Adam Pryor  09:26 That's right. Hey, now, don't worry. You're gonna feel good about talking about houses soon? Yeah. No, like, there's this, this element that I do kind of wonder like, are we not necessarily good representative samples across the board? One because of education, but to because of access to probably I would assume reasonable health insurance, even if not great health insurance? Rachael Jackson  09:55 If reasonable means that it costs the same as my mortgage then yes, yes. I have actually Access to reasonable health insurance. I, Ian Binns  10:05 we realized and I this was interesting to me, and this is not saying anything bad about where I used to work, but the health coverage in Louisiana was better than it is here in North Carolina, now that the services Yeah, there's no I'm not worried about anything. But when it came to the insurance part, like the premiums that we had to pay every month were lower than, you know, for me and and on it than it would have been for here and I. But then, if we they had a really interesting system there. It was called LSU. First, it was like a three tiered system. And the first year was LSU. First and if provider or hospital was part of the LSU, first, you paid nothing. Like that was part of their system. There was no copay, nothing. It was amazing. And then you had like, then the next tier was is that you had, they were in network, and then you had your deductible, right, and your copay. And then you had out of network deductible copay, which is obviously a whole lot more. But it was just, I remember seeing that when we got down there. And I just like, Whoa, that's amazing. So even when the twins are born, the hospital we did it in was one that was under the LSU first system. So it was considerably cheaper than it would have been if we gone to the other hospital. Which I find fascinating. But I think one of the things that really helped me was all about middle aged stuff, and insurance and all those things that when I did have that issue, that infection in my finger, they weren't sure what was going on. And we were sitting in the earth or the hand surgeon's office, and they were trying to look at it. Like, we don't know what this is. But we know we have to do an immersion surgery tonight. And this was at three o'clock in the afternoon telling us this. I do remember and then having to call the hospitals to make sure they took my medical insurance. Now I'm on the state health plan. So ended up not being a problem. But I do recall also to either the PA or the doctor or somebody suggesting to and make sure the hospital that we're going to take your insurance. Right. And I be I was always shocked. I'm still shocked by that, that. That's just unbelievable, right. And by the second surgery, which was in April of that year, I had reached my out of pocket maximum. So I paid nothing else the year when I would go the doctor, even for PT because of the hand. They In fact, even the physician's assistant at the time was like, well, we probably want to get you an occupational therapy. I'm not sure what your insurance looks like. And I said, Well, I've meet I've met the out of pocket maximum. He's like, Oh, well, we're just gonna write you for a whole bunch of them then. But it was just that mindset of that's what's so wrong with our system. So we'll get there, Kendra, you'll get there. Kendra Holt-Moore  13:05 Hi. Yeah, I've got some stories to share already. My husband almost went deaf a couple years ago. And so the doctor's bills of trying to like get that all sorted out. It's pretty insane. Rachael Jackson  13:21 Yep. I wanted to tackle one of your other points there, Adam. We were saying that. No, why not? Right, is it that we're just kind of status quo. And then at this, at this particular point in life, people focus on mental health, as opposed to strictly physical health of those, the two are often quite related. So that but the one of the other pieces that I was really thinking about is also at this point of life. And let's let's clarify. So I just asked two and a half questions. So let me ask a third actual question and start there. How are we defining middle life? Adam Pryor  14:08 How do you want to define middle middle life or middle age? Rachael Jackson  14:14 Yeah, I think that's a crucial question. Adam Pryor  14:19 Right? We were talking a little bit before, like things started right like that it keeps getting pushed older. I'm going to blame the baby boomers, because I blame them for everything. And I'm assuming that they just don't want to be old. So they want middle age to go further and further and further, right. Like, now middle ages to 65. And I'm like, No, no, no, you're old. You're not middle aged anymore. You're your past middle aged. I like to use 40. That's the number that I think of. And like plus or minus 40. Right. But like it there's something about that like statistically I am closer to death than I am closer to both Right, and that impending move that I go, that's to me where the like the middle life piece hits, which I know is not necessarily a popular answer. And there are different ways to do it. But it feels very 15:15 straightforward to me. Kendra Holt-Moore  15:38 makes sense to me like I wouldn't. Yeah, I wouldn't say that, like 65 should be the new like middle aged mark. But 40 does feel young ish to me. Like, again, I'm speaking as the non middle aged person in the virtual room. But I think that, like technological advancements, people are living longer and will continue to live longer than we had previously. And so it does, it makes sense to me to have middle age, scoot a little bit further back then the 40. Mark, because I just, yeah, just like, a lot of older people I know who are like grandparents or great grandparents, or I know a lot of people who live well into their 90s. And, you know, not saying that, that's like the norm for everyone, but it's becoming more the norm. And so, yeah, I would scooch it back. Adam Pryor  16:34 It could be that I'm still fully anticipating to die by 80. Yeah, possibly seven. Kendra Holt-Moore  16:38 Middle Age, right. Rachael Jackson  16:40 But so when I was looking, and there's a it depends where you look, when does it start, I've seen the start of middle age be 3540 or 45. And the end of middle age be either 60 or 65. I haven't seen middle age end later than 65. The average life expectancy for the United States for men is 80. And for women 84. So I think you're not wrong, Adam to say that you don't expect to live past 80. That's the average life expectancy of men, your personal genetics, your family, genetics, your lifestyle. All of that, of course, has an issue, but 40 is straight up minute like you've literally lived half your life. Right? Like from a mathematical standpoint, none of us actually know when we're going to die. But given statistics, half is done. Right. And I think and then from a female standpoint, right, our physiol our physiology, right? If if we're only seen of as birthing machines, then then the question might be, when does half of your birthing abilities end? Right? So if we, if we look at what menstruation starts and say 13, rounding small nut rate 13. And when does it end? 5055. Right, depending on depending, again, dependent. So if we say 55. So it's 20 years, or excuse me, 40 years, half of that is 35. Right? So from a female biological standpoint, 35 would be the start of middle aged half of your birthing your reproductive life is over. So in that way, and and that's a medical place. So I think 35 is also not an not an air. When we look at jobs, people aren't necessarily retiring at 60 or 62, or even 65. Right? Some people are working until 7075. So to say, Well, I'm How long is my work history. So if my work history is 50 years, and I start when I'm 22, middle age isn't going to start until I'm 45. Right? So I I think there's value and understanding when we're talking these ages that there's a lot of different lenses that we can use. And from a from a psychological and an emotional standpoint. I see middle aged also and not necessarily in this generation because people are living so much longer. really starting to kick in. And the end of middle age. Where middle age ends is when your next when the generation before you has died. When you know if we're if we're looking at the natural order of things and saying Okay, my parents, my aunts and uncles, all of them, they've died. I'm next. And to me, that's one of those places that indicates the end of middle age. That's how, from an emotional standpoint, which is also why like, why should I go to the doctor, I don't want them to find things. I don't want I don't want That reality, Ian Binns  20:01 so helps you realize that you're not or that you are mortal. Rachael Jackson  20:06 Right? Right. I mean, teenagers and adolescence that's a better term adolescence go through an invincible stage. I think in middle age, we go through an immortal stage. I know, I know, I can get hurt, but I'm gonna live forever. Adam Pryor  20:27 reckoning with mortality. Rachael Jackson  20:29 Yes. Yeah. And it's hard. Adam Pryor  20:35 does kind of suck any other way to put it. Ian Binns  20:42 So I started looking at, like signs that you have reached middle age, Rachael Jackson  20:45 or what people think and know when those were written. So if you're looking at, you know, like huffington post things, make sure when they're ready. Yeah, Ian Binns  20:54 that one's funny. The Huffington Post one that was update in 2017. There's some pretty funny ones on here. Rachael Jackson  21:02 Are you gonna Why are you just gonna leave it like that? No, hold Ian Binns  21:04 on, a hair starts appearing everywhere. When your nose face ears. Hair Reading on your? Yeah, Reading on your phone becomes difficult because the font is suddenly too tiny and blurry. The shed or basement becomes your favorite place. you've Adam Pryor  21:21 dug a little too, too close to home. Ian Binns  21:24 That's why I read that one. Oh. You begin thinking policemen, teachers and doctors look really young. Yeah. Yeah. You are obsessed with your health. You begin looking over the top of your glasses. You start enjoying naps more than ever. Rachael Jackson  21:50 No. naps are for everything. Except for as punishment for children. Right? Because they think it's a punishment. But Adam Pryor  21:58 yeah, forever. Ian Binns  22:00 You find yourself saying what and huh? All the time. You find a lot harder to lose weight a whole lot harder. You don't know any of the songs played on the radio. Gardening becomes an obsession. You develop? You develop little leaks. This is a good one. Yeah. You grow and every time you bend over, Rachael Jackson  22:28 that could have happened to anybody at different times, depending on what their birthing was like. Ian Binns  22:34 Yeah. Anyway, those are some some. Yeah. Adam Pryor  22:40 I hadn't hadn't thought about defining middle aged by how leaky you are. Kind of like that. Mm hmm. So I can't wait. Kendra Holt-Moore  22:55 Some of those already apply though, actually. Yeah. Ian Binns  22:57 See, I told you, you're on your way. Yeah, that's fine. Rachael Jackson  23:02 It's the alternative. Adam Pryor  23:07 what's the alternative? Rachael Jackson  23:09 data? Adam Pryor  23:11 Ah, I like that, that no one's used forever. Nobody. Nobody went with like the transhumanist answer there. That's good. That's good. Rachael Jackson  23:21 We covered that. That's, that's not what we want. That we want. We want death. Ian Binns  23:26 So I wish dear listener Tune in next time when Kendra takes us on a conversation about death. Oh, yeah, it's gonna be great. Adam Pryor  23:35 In preparation for that conversation about death is as we reach this sort of, like, middle aged piece, right, we talked a little bit about this, this idea that like, mental health becomes a big piece of how people think about it. And there's this in a lot of the in a lot of research, there's this this sort of description of a longing for youth, right, a sort of almost like a nostalgia for things that you used to be able to do. But now, perhaps that was no longer a good idea is my way of describing it. So I ran into this the other day, when I was throwing Linus up in the air. And I went, did that was a it was a poor decision in relationship to when I did this with Henry. And I didn't even like think about it. And Henry was a heavier child, and that made me more depressed. I've known what that experience was Rachael Jackson  24:33 like, but just to clarify, the two of them are what, nine years apart Adam Pryor  24:36 nine years apart? Yeah. Were you stronger than I am immortal, more physically? Ian Binns  24:45 were you doing more physical things and like physically fit the new aren't new and Adam Pryor  24:49 now I feel as though I feel like I can say that for like, a 37 year old. I am like, relatively fit. I went out and biked 105 months. Last weekend, like I feel thing, I feel relatively fit. I've been cycling a lot like, you know, I don't feel undue in that regard, but also, like, not like when I was in my, you know, mid 20s and could swing my child around without abandon no matter what. Ian Binns  25:21 Well, all the reason why I'm asking this because like, for example, because of, you know, when I joined f3, and started doing boot camp style workouts, when I was a kid, and stuff and a runner, I never had upper body strength. So I can never do pull ups or anything like that. Now, I can't go out right now and knock knock many pull ups out because I'm not because of the pandemic as I've I've never really worked on physical strength, like I had before. But when I was training for those Spartan races, yeah, I can knock out pull ups, and that was 39 4041. So I was definitely more physically stronger than than I was maybe when the kids were born. Was that's why I was asking like, Is it just because in middle age now there are aches and pains that I have now that didn't especially back pains, back and neck pains that you're just like, oh, that was one of the ones I did not read off. Back in, like back in that pains. And then it also made me think to one of the things I saw on another list was purchasing your decor for your house. That if you're more excited about that, then other things, toys or whatever, that's obviously a big difference, Rachael Jackson  26:30 like going out on Saturday night. A fun date on Saturday night is like Home Depot, Target, and Sam's. Yeah. You know, yeah, free samples. Adam Pryor  26:40 Or then even like the type of good free samples are back, I just want to Rachael Jackson  26:44 do that for you. They're not back for us. They Adam Pryor  26:46 are they're coming back for us. And it is going to drive my grocery bill down. Yeah, because I get to eat me some free samples. Ian Binns  26:57 That's a middle aged thing. I would say cuz you're sitting there wouldn't I mean, can you say what you said it to drive my grocery bill down? Adam Pryor  27:05 That's right. That's what I'm worried about. Kendra Holt-Moore  27:06 I don't know if that's a middle aged. Rachael Jackson  27:09 shoe. That's a cheap thing. Ian Binns  27:11 That's a cheap item. Okay. You're right. That's that's just cheap. Adam. That's true. Rachael Jackson  27:17 That's true. Okay, in typical Rachael fashion. Can we talk about the positives, though? Adam Pryor  27:26 There are positives. There are parts. Are you sure? Because I bet I can split all your positives into negatives. Okay, Rachael Jackson  27:34 you were just saying you're not as strong as you were before. Ian Binns  27:36 I need my popcorn. Well played on that one, Rachel, thank you. I'm ready. I'm ready. Remember, she lifts weights. Flip it. Rachael Jackson  27:48 One of the things that I think really happens to people in this category of middle age, however a person chooses to identify when it starts and when's it ends, is a really knowing oneself. And this is where I think the midlife crisis concept comes in, where a person finally realizes that they are mortal. And that time is the most precious thing that we have. And because of that, we don't want to waste it. And so there's a reevaluation of life a reevaluation of priorities of reevaluation of self. And that transformation, that metamorphosis, I think, is absolutely beautiful. And there's a sort of understanding of not really caring as much what others think that a particular age you know, that turns into curmudgeonly old men usually, but it's, it develops in a nice way early. So that that that for me is one of the biggest positives that I see in this category of middle age. Adam Pryor  29:25 But I'm gonna just turn that on its head a little bit, right, like, cuz that might go really poorly. And what was well, right, so I think part of what goes on with that midlife crisis is exactly this sort of like self awareness that you're describing, right? But what happens when you're aware that the self you've become is drastically, drastically not what you want to be, Rachael Jackson  29:48 then you change Adam Pryor  29:52 or you buy a convertible Rachael Jackson  29:54 or get a tattoo you find really poor coping mechanisms. Correct. Given that that's at every stage Well, yes, I'm in the hence the poor weight loss issues. Yeah. Right then. But I mean, I think of an unhealthy coping mechanism that our society has made a joke of, but I don't Adam Pryor  30:15 I think part of this is that like the, the discovery of self is not inherently positive. Right? It's a sort of neutral item, I think, Oh, Rachael Jackson  30:27 really? Ian Binns  30:29 When that'd be based on perspective, load the discovery of like, yeah, I, I'm with you, Rachel, you say, say that, again, Adam Pryor  30:38 the discovery of self is not inherently positive. I think it's neutral. Kendra Holt-Moore  30:43 Oh, yeah. I agree with that. Rachael Jackson  30:45 Same Oh, Kendra. Kendra Holt-Moore  30:49 I just, I mean, it's such a personal like process. But I think what I hear when Adam says that is that people over the course of their lives, and not just in middle age, although I'm sure it can, like, Look, a particular way, because that's when we talk about things like midlife crisis, and all of that, but people have different like practices and hobbies, and you know, life circumstances change you and you just become more self aware over the course of your life, or not everyone does become more self aware, actually. And it just, yeah, I think, what, what Adam just said, is that, like, you can wake up one day and realize that you're not who you hoped you would be, and might also find it really hard to change into who you hope to be. And I don't know, like, there's just a million factors that play into, like, what constitutes the self? And I guess that's maybe the bigger, more daunting question is, like, what do we what are we discovering when we discover the self, but I just think that, yeah, like to be satisfied with the self, that you discover, probably has a lot to do with things like, healthy support system, and financial stability, and, you know, like, meaning making processes that are, you know, accessible to you. And, and that, I mean, those things aren't like, what we typically consider to be an inherent part of the self, but they, I think, make life a lot easier for us to become our best selves. And, and so yeah, it's just, it feels like a really, like, life is complicated. discovering who we are, or creating ourselves. The way that we want to be is just, yeah, it's a real mixed bag for people. And so it feels really intuitive to me that that, that does, that it is a neutral process, because it can be it can look very good for some people and very bad for others. And it's wrapped up in all of these like social factors, too. And some people just don't have a lot of control over those things and what they do have control over? Well, yeah, I guess that's still, that's still brings us to a conversation about like, you know, it's it's not what it's not about, like what you can't control, but it's about like, the attitude you have towards the things you can't control, like little quotes like that about, you know, who you are, who you're not, and, yeah, so anyway, I just find that a really intuitive way to talk about like self discovery. What does that not feel? I'm curious about what, what you guys are thinking Rachel and he and, Dan, Ian Binns  33:52 I think the way you said it was a lot nicer. I'm just gonna say it. So Adam Pryor  33:59 the way Kendra said it? Ian Binns  34:01 I do. I do. Because I feel like it still gets the way I was thinking of it was a perspective thing, right? It's how you approach it. And and I think that shifts, depending on what stage of life you're in, and also can just depend on the day, you know, or the moment that you're experiencing something. And so I guess, over time, it could average out as neutral feeling that way. But go ahead. Well, so one of the things that, you know, that I This helped a lot with, like all of the mindfulness meditation I've done is to really focus on which I just hit one year, 34:44 daily. Ian Binns  34:45 Last Friday, I was very excited with that 10% happier group. But is that right? And then I still also we're still working progress, obviously but recognizing what I can and cannot control and to learn it. let that go is tough. Right? So I think by the fact that I'm getting better at that than I used to be, that would make it I think things more positive, because I'm recognizing what I have control over. But if I'm in a foul mood, or struggling on that day, it doesn't matter. This Yeah. It will be a negative perspective. So, Kendra Holt-Moore  35:27 yeah, yeah. And I just wanted to add that, like, what I just said, I could see how maybe it sounds like a little bit deterministic of like, oh, what, what's around you makes you who you are. And I do think that's true to an extent, but also, like, what you're saying, in the personal practices, we have to try to, you know, like, create ourselves or however you want to phrase that. It's, it's a matter of practice and like determination to some extent that. Yeah, you might not feel the same every day. And that's okay. I don't think that really like, changes your, like, fundamental being, it's just that, like, we, I think humans, we have practices for ourselves, we participate in rituals, we have community and support systems, because that those things do create a boundedness around who we perceive ourselves to be. And we, we each have many different roles in our families, and friends and communities. And that those are all ways that we, that we do, like, derive a sense of who we are. And some of that's like aspirational, you know, like, if you strip that all away, like, what, how would that make you different than who you are? In your role as like, teacher, pastor, Mother, you know, all of these things? So it's just like a really, it's a really difficult question, I think, to, to answer without thinking about the things we do to practice being ourselves in the forms of, you know, practices like meditation or attending that, like, a Bible study group every Sunday, or showing up to class to teach every week, you know, things like that. So just wanted to add that Rachel has a very quizzical look on her face. Yeah, Rachael Jackson  37:25 I I hear what you're saying. totals, parent medical tangential aside, I think everyone needs to go through active listening and assertive speaking. training. So I hear what you're saying. I think I'm coming at it from a very different place. from a place of I think, Adam, you said status quo. Right? That's, that's one of the characteristics of this time of life is status quo. And when I compare that to other phases of life, say, if we look at, right post middle age, what happens after middle age? What, like, what happens? What how are we? How are we calling that old? elderly? Right? I, it depends. And then there's medical terminology of elderly or older, or frail, all of those different fragile, right, these are all medical terms that can be used in those ways. But if we say, elderly, right or old, right, you have middle age, and you go to old, and you go to elderly, old and elderly, are in our society, because that's someone that we can really speak to, are categorized, often by the decline of the body, and the re evaluation of the self outside of a profession. Whether that profession was raising children, or having a career or whatever it was with that there's there's a shift in our culture of Oh, now you're retired. And that's, that's a very big shift in our human doing our productivity, our you have to, so that our society is very surrounded around that. So I think older and elderly are really looking at redefining the self outside of a profession. And in terms of the body, right, the body itself starts to really decline in those points. Youth, adolescence, is categorized and for me looked at as finding yourself within society, like pushing the boundaries, where is authority? How do I fit in? How do I fit there, like I am knowing mostly who I am, but it's an age of exploration. This status quo is a I've established what my career is more Less, I've established more or less, at least a partnership or not a partnership, a child like rearing children or not rearing children that there's a, these things are not necessarily fully brand new at this point, right? Most people don't say at 50. Now I want children when I didn't want them for the last 30 years. It could be a Oh, shucks. Now we have another right there. I mean, it's not saying that it doesn't happen, but that it rarely at that stage of life, is it a, yes, this is what I want. And I've never given it any thought. But that it's a status quo, which allows us to then in a slow, methodical, or not even methodical, but in a in a status quo sort of way to say, is this who I am. And I think and I will, I will very much saying I really appreciate you pointing out Kendra, that this is coming from a point of privilege. This is most definitely coming from a place of privilege that I didn't earn. Some of it, I did most of it, I didn't. And that there are people who don't have the privilege to have that conversation of self, which is one of the the markers of modernity, as opposed to pre modern era, right, they didn't have this luxury work for 15 hours a day, six days a week is. So having said all of that I come from a place of this is our time to just sort of slow down and figure out what what not what we're trying to reclaim, which is what I think you were trying to look at Adam, but how to re hone who we are. And even if it's a even if it's a 180 from who we are, it's a I can now confidently say at 40. I am an introvert. I am not shy. But I'm definitely an introvert I am a low energy person. I am a particular food eater. not picky. But I like what I like. And I'm gonna change that a whole lot. And it's okay that I like blue box mac and cheese. And I'm not going to apologize for that. And I'm not going to feel bad about it. I'm not going to feel bad about who I am or my choices and feel like someone's judging me. Anything that's that's the recognition of self that has nothing to do with my role as a clergy person, as a spouse as a parent. It's a Who am I What do I like to do? What are the things that make me happy? Not my mood. And if you'll if you'll allow me the ability to make one more analogy. One of the things I hear you saying Ian is really like weather. Today's weather. How do I feel today? Right? And that's weather. Right today? Like it was 105 degrees in Billings, Montana yesterday, that is absurd. And it snowed in Texas. And that is absurd. Right? The weather is the daily changes, but the climate. That's what we're looking at now. And I'm saying at this point in our life, this is when we can recognize the climate is changing. Can we change it? Do we want it to change? if so how? Right? cooler Texas sounds great, hotter, Montana, not great. Warmer oceans, bad idea. Poor little sharks, heard a whole story on sharks and being in mermaid purses and stuff like that, and how warm oceans are making them die. Like that. That would be the negative. But I think inherently it is good, I think inherently. And that's why I'm saying it's not inherently neutral. I think it's inherently good to look at oneself in the mirror and say this is who I am. And I'm good with that. So that that for me is the positive. Because we're not focusing on developing the career rearing the young worrying about our bodies. Again, speaking from a place of privilege. Adam Pryor  44:30 Okay with that, if you're good with it. It's the person who looks at it and says, I'm not, and there's no mechanism to change that I look at and go, that's a that's a different sort of notion of what self discovery is. Rachael Jackson  44:49 Why is there not a mechanism to change that's what I don't understand. Adam Pryor  44:54 privilege. Rachael Jackson  44:57 Can you say more? Yeah. You're like me, I'm dead body? Adam Pryor  45:01 No. So I do it this way. I'm Joe trucker. And Joe trucker has woken up at 45. And gone, I spent 20 years of my life driving truck. And I'm not sure that I believe that I've actually done anything good in the world. And I would like to do something good in the world. And I have no savings by which to change the structure of the day to day grind that I find myself in. That is not a moment of self discovery that I would say is inherently good. Rachael Jackson  45:33 disagree. Adam Pryor  45:35 But I think that's because you assume the structure of knowing the truth is good. Rachael Jackson  45:41 I do assume that, Adam Pryor  45:43 and I do. Ian Binns  45:44 But you are also Adam. I feel like with the example you just gave, you're still not fully in that person's perspective. No, no, no, no, you've not you've not lived that perspective. So you do not know. So that's the the, the To me, it sounds like. And so I want to push back a little bit on that, like I see your point, Adam, with that example, based on my perspective, I would I would potentially see that the same way. But based on the person who's lived that entire life in their perspective, I don't, I don't, I can't say how I would say, Adam Pryor  46:19 if you can't say how you would see it, I also don't think you can say self discovery is inherently good. Rachael Jackson  46:24 But I see what the problem that I have with your analogy, is that you're basing that on a person's profession, that person could then say, Yep, I am a trucker. And I feel like I haven't done anything good in the world. Now, let me go be a trucker for a company that I feel does good in the world. Or now let me take this time that I have, because I might truck 60 hours a week, but I have two hours that I could give. And I'd rather do that because this is a lack that I feel and I can do something about that. So so the profession might not change the situation of having savings might not change. But that self discovery can be a very positive change. Adam Pryor  47:05 But But I think cannon is are two different things. It can be a positive change, Rachael Jackson  47:13 there is no try only do Adam Pryor  47:15 like, but will it be is is is also a is part of what I would press back on there. And why I would call it neutral. Okay. Kendra Holt-Moore  47:26 Yeah, I was gonna also reflect that I think that Adams hypothetical, it's not that the hypothetical is always the case that like Joe trucker is going to reflect on his his himself as, you know, being like in a negative or positive position. It's just that both of those possibilities can happen. And because of the potential for that to go that either way, that that's where the neutrality lies. Adam Pryor  48:01 I mean, I work in higher ed, I I'm generally in favor of self discovery, as like something that's important. Rachael Jackson  48:07 Yeah. You sway me towards neutrality. I can, I can see that. But But you're right, Adam, I do I do believe that, you know, the more truth we know. That is inherently good. That I do. That is more my my perspective, my worldview. I do not believe of ignorance is bliss, kind of Ian Binns  48:32 reverse. I agree with that worldview. Of course, there are things that we can learn. That is true that we may not like when you put it all together. I still feel like yeah, it's better to know when you put it all together, again. Now, you can come with example right now that would be like, Oh, I'm betting he wouldn't like this. And then you tell me and I'd get mad. But then after that, I'll do Adam Pryor  49:05 that alone. I'll let you do in your optimism for a while. That's fun. Thank you Rachael Jackson  49:10 do in optimism. That means that it's going to concentrate more and I'm going to be even more optimistic then. Adam Pryor  49:17 That does seem to be how it works for people. Rachael Jackson  49:20 It is I'm sorry, you don't understand it. Okay, well, optimistic me. Cuz that's who I am. And I'm not gonna apologize for it. But that's okay. Um, is there anything else? Good? Adam Pryor  49:46 I don't know You were the one who said you could come up with good things about about middle age. Rachael Jackson  49:50 Yeah, Adam Pryor  49:51 I mean, I was I was just here to turn them over and make them bad. Yeah. So Rachael Jackson  49:58 I think the take no crap attitude. is a good thing. Ian Binns  50:01 All right, I wouldn't say that necessarily comes with it. Kendra Holt-Moore  50:06 And also, I could turn you potentially like just to get, I feel like I'm really with Adam in this crap attitude is something that I am, I also am like starting to feel the older I get, I was actually just talking about this with my sister who is in her mid 20s. And how we like, are definitely starting to care a lot less about what other people say, the older we get, and how that can be a great thing. But it can also make you a Karen well, so you know, good and bad. I say this for myself, too. Because I, I don't want to I don't want to be a caring. But sometimes it's it's hard not started to manager. Adam Pryor  51:00 I think what starts to like put itself out there, right? Are these there's a mixed bag of what this process of reaching middle age both in terms of like bodily health, mental health, the process of self evaluation, like dope. It can take us in different directions, much like other stages of life, right. So like, even if we talk about Middle Ages, this status quo, right between because I liked your like Rachel, like the like, curve up in the curve down. Right the like, there's development and growth. And this is exciting, but also, like I would never ever want to be a teenager again. middle aged feels much better than being a teenager. I'm watching my child reach into teenage them and going I hate you go back to being a child or skip right into being 20. But this this mid No, no, nobody likes you right now. I say that to the cat, also, but that's fine. So like, there's that element, right? And then I think you can say the same thing on the other side, right like that. Like I like your distinction between old and elderly. Right? Like there's this element of I remember speaking with a very good scholar at a conference, and she sort of halfway joked about I just can't think as fast as I used to. And sort of stopped and paused and then said, No, but I really mean it like this, this body that I am now is not who I am. Right? There's this element of like being betrayed by one's physical sensations, which in middle age, I feel like hasn't happened yet. Like you can be slightly dissatisfied or there's hair where there wasn't here before. There might be a grown. There's a grown from lifting things up and throwing children around. But right. But like in general, there's there's not that sense of like bodily betrayal that can come later. But I think there is this element. Right. And this is what I think is curious about the whole middle aged conversation where it intersects with health is this this element of like, an awareness of that status of old and elder of that eventual bodily betrayal suddenly being around the corner which can feel impending in a positive or negative way. I mean, the way I phrased it does not make it sound great. But I understand it could be phrased positively. Ian Binns  53:39 But it comes back to the mortality conversation we were having earlier. Adam Pryor  53:42 Yeah, right. I feel like like Middle Ages, this like element of like, mortality, contemplation, and depending on how positive or negative you are, right, like waiting for the other shoe to drop of being old and elderly or of having old and elderly cut short. Right. So I, my my thinking about this has like changed since I said that I would start to do it right, because we had this local pastor who died very suddenly. You know, truck came across the highway hit ambu. So Harley, and his 10 year old daughter died almost instantly. 13 year old survived, which is miraculously Ian Binns  54:28 weird. longer. That happened a Adam Pryor  54:31 week two weeks ago. Okay. So it's this, right? And I'm a fairly well educated, I did all the pastoral training stuff I can identify when I'm parallel processing. And yet it doesn't stop that process of parallel processing right like it continues to occur. And, you know, my my wife and I mccobb Lee joked while also sort of doing the process of grieving that as part of that to say You know, she she halfway of that when I said like, I'm, you know, I'm going on right and 100 miles like, also she's like, and then you'll never come back. That's what I think about every time you walk out the door with your bicycle, and you get run over, or you're going to flip over the handlebars. And it's not fun, right? In the same way that like, there's this like element that creeps in that like, you know, every time I send my pre adolescent teen who I hope will soon be 20 out on his bicycle to like ride to school, I'm like, someone's going to run you over, then you'll just be dead. And I feel like that is a hallmark of middle age that there is this, like awareness that creeps into the way in which you treat all of these other health related concerns. Rachael Jackson  55:52 Yeah, I think so. I mean, to share something sort of personal. They're one of I've always been with people who are night owls. And so my husband now like, stays out until two o'clock, three o'clock in the morning, sometimes even later. That's just his personality, and it's fine for us. But I it's fine for our relationship. But I as a person and emotionally go, oh my god, he's not coming home. Oh my God. He said he'd be home at two and it's 230. And what is going on? And just last night, like I'm asleep, and it's almost two o'clock. It's like 145 in the morning, and I see this bright light in my eyes. Like what is going on is like, I need you to get up the cars in a ditch. And my heart just like skipped a beat. I was just like, but you're in the house. So you're okay. Like, okay, so the cars in a ditch, like that was one of my big that was that was a big fear. And oh, yeah, I'm like trying to figure he's okay. But he's great. But he like he was the one that shined the flashlight in my face. He's like, you need to wake up. But having confronting it in those ways, saying, This is exactly my fear. And so every time you leave the house, this is what I feel like. Adam Pryor  57:07 But I think it's that element to that. It's like, it's not just your own mortality, that's part of this, right? Like, it's this recognition of is literally everyone else's mortality, and how that sort of works for you. Right? Rachael Jackson  57:19 Everyone's going to die. Adam Pryor  57:21 Right? Like, every time Rachel's, like every time you walk out the door with your bicycle, I'm afraid you're gonna die. I'm like, Well, every time you gave birth, I was pretty sure that I was going to be parenting by myself. So, you know, live with it. But also, like, Rachael Jackson  57:36 but it is this sort of shillington that three times you do this every week, just like Adam Pryor  57:41 my level of intense fear was justified, because that's a horrible process birthing. I mean, it's beautiful, but also, like, try Holy smokes Ian Binns  57:50 on that we. So while we were going through the classes when I was pregnant with the twins, and there were classes specific for multiples, right. And so they were talking about, it'll have to be a C section. Sometimes it could be emergency c sections. And sometimes there could be complications, but and so they were trying to tell the dads that, you know, there's a chance that if you're in a surgery, there's a complication that may have to whisk you out of the room, but everything's gonna be okay. So they were telling us, and I just raised my hand and said, yeah, that doesn't work for me. And they just said, What do you mean doesn't work for you? I said, So you're telling me that there could be a potential that for like an hour, I would have no idea what's going on with my wife who just gave birth these two babies. And you want me to be like, Oh, cool. And I just I kept pushing back. And finally, but and helped me change your perspective, saying that? Well, honey, if that did happen, it would help me knowing that you are with our children. Making sure they're okay. Right. And so the perspective had to shift for me, but I see your point on that one. I mean, it was like, You can't just say that and then be like, but it's all good, you're fine. And it made while waiting for them to give her the epidural because it was a C section. And so I had to wait outside of the operating room for them to do that process. And I would see because we had two teams of doctors, nurses and stuff for the babies. And then of course, the doctor and the nurses for and that they're all walking in and out and I'm just sitting there staring down going in and out. And I did that that was tough. I was those exciting moment. But for those few moments, it was terrifying. I Adam Pryor  59:31 mean, I think the intensity of those sorts of moments that you have, like earlier in your life are now spread at a low level across every day. Zack is never gonna let me lead an episode ever again. Ian Binns  59:47 I can't wait till we start with like the beginning of what we do with stories and you get to tell a story and then Okay, everyone. What Rachael Jackson  59:52 do you guys have no idea how to pull us out of this ditch. Kendra Holt-Moore  59:57 We will knock on the door of death. Ian Binns  1:00:04 We're right now we're approaching the door next time we're just Adam Pryor  1:00:07 going right up to it. Yeah, Rachael Jackson  1:00:10 that was my Zach that's it. I Adam Pryor  1:00:12 got an attack that clearly the Rachael Jackson  1:00:14 death's door Yeah. Not gonna happen next time next time knocking on Adam Pryor  1:00:19 door knocking on death's door. This time, just hairs in places where they're not supposed to be.

Episode 87 For many people, pregnancy is an exciting and hopeful time, but for carriers of hereditary diseases, it can be a nightmare. For centuries, matchmakers and family historians have done their best to arrange marriages that would result in healthy offspring, but with modern genetic testing, we can take all the guesswork out of it. Couples can nearly handpick their future children and monitor every step of their development for potential problems. While there are so many opportunities for human flourishing, there are also plenty of moral and ethical quandaries to consider. When does a living tissue become a human being with rights? When does a human being take on the image of God or develop a soul? You might be surprised at what our sacred scriptures and religious traditions do and do not have to say on the matter!    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis      Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.    Zack Jackson 00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are Zack Jackson UCC pastor and Reading Pennsylvania. And before I had kids, I wished that they would inherit my thick brown hair, which I had gotten from my father and his father before them. And at least one of my children has it.   Rachael Jackson 00:32 Beautiful. Rachael Jackson, Rabbi at Agoudas, Israel, congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina. And before I had a child, I wished that they would inherit a combination of my dark hair, but my husband's thick, wavy, wonderful hair.   Zack Jackson 00:55 Well, as it turns out, I have two sons. And one of them has thick blond hair, and the other one has thin brown hair. So genetics, how about you how to work out for you,   Rachael Jackson 01:06 so works out. So my husband's hair is a blonde with some red undertones. And his beard is, you know, definitely blonde, brown, red combination. I have for those that haven't seen pictures of me, I have extremely dark chocolate brown hair, where it looks black in some light. And our son that has just straight up watered down chocolate brown hair kind of looks like oh, maybe cappuccino or something like that. And its thickness is a combination to it's not nearly as thick and whatever, I can't think of the right adjective to describe my husband's hair. But it's also not as thin as mine, I have very fine hair. So my son's hair is not very fine. But it has a mind of its own. And that's just hilarious. And now that he's seven, I was under the impression that maybe we should start combing it or something. We hadn't really before this. combed it. And so I tried to do that the other day, and he looks at me and he's just like, I don't care. I went, Okay, do your life. I'm not gonna carry you there. That's fine. That's fine.   Zack Jackson 02:31 You know, of all of the hard to believe crazy. Out of this world, complicated parts about this universe, genetics are one of the things that really blows my mind. Like it's just sexual reproduction in and of itself, that you can take the building blocks of one creature and another creature, and just like strip them down into a soup, and then make something new, that isn't like 5050. That could be any number of proportion of whatever of either one, and you have no idea what's going to come out the other side. And yet, what does come out the other side is often fairly recognizable, that you'd be like, yeah, my son really does look like me. And he's got my nervous tics. And he's my other son does not and my one son is allergic to the sun, which is not really allergic to it. It's a it's a weird short circuit in your brain where you get too much light and you sneeze. My mom had it. I have it. And one of my sons has it. But not the others. No, not the other.   Rachael Jackson 03:43 Yeah, well, genetics is so bizarre, maybe that's why we'd like Legos. Right? Like imagine that, that are four base pairs that make up our DNA at that combine. One again, from a scientific standpoint, we need one male and one female in our genetics to make this happen. combined these genes and next thing you know, you get a completely different structure. But what's amazing is that it's so similar. Unlike Legos, right? Where you sort of take one person, you strip them down to their base pairs, you take the other person strip them down to their base pairs, you combine it and it looks like their child's like it looks like their results. It could have the the possibilities that it could be something completely different is amazing. Right? So when you have there's this concept of recessive gene, add dominant gene. So if you have, let's say, for example, that you have two people who have brown eyes and their child is overwhelmingly Going to then have brown eyes. But perhaps let's say the mom, her mom has blue eyes, right? So this, this would be child, this hypothetical child's grandparent has blue eyes. So there's the potential of this child to then have blue eyes. But it's such a low potential, because it is a recessive gene, not a dominant gene. And that question of what is recessive and what is dominant? And what is just, you know, not for us to decide, and it's just sort of like a grab bag. And where are these things? And do we know where they are? What are the traits? How do we find them and mapping that on to this genetic code, or the genome is absolutely fascinating. And humans have their own particular genome, fruit flies, like anything that has DNA has a genome, this is one of the things that we talked about several weeks ago, when we were talking with Professor Dan Janis, and looking at the genome of these viruses, right, so they were using RNA, and we use DNA, but it's the same sort of concept that we can figure out where these things are, and what happens if we mess with them. And, and that's where the conversation that I wanted to go today is what happens when we mess with them. So in our series, we've been talking, sort of going through the life cycle of people. So last time, we were able to talk about puberty and different ideas there. And so this week, I really wanted to focus on sort of the next stage of life, which is pregnancy and all the things that come up for people around that time of life. And a caveat, something that I feel that I, I need to say, not just that I feel like I need to say, if a person or people choose not to have children, that is their choice. And that is a perfectly good way to live. And if people choose to have one, if people choose to have 10, that is their choice. And so that's something that I also want to be very clear today that just because we're talking about this does not mean that it is the way to live in our worlds, and I feel the societal pressure that, wow, you're not really, you're only having one, what's wrong with you, or you're choosing to be child free, not to child less. And so there is nothing less about not choosing to have a child. So even if you yourself, our listeners have not had a child or choosing not to have a child, I think this conversation can still be important because it's going to bring in questions of ethics, and medical ethics. So I just I just wanted to put that out there. And also I'll be using the terms male and female to identify rather than gendered terms of woman and man. Because we recognize and we support and our allies, to our LGBTQ family, and our friends. And so we recognize that the human species needs to have male and female in order to reproduce, how a person expresses themselves and who they are gendered is not necessarily part of that conversation then. So I just wanted to add those caveats in those that understanding in our conversation today. So all of that, all of that to say, it's totally amazing that we can take DNA from two different people split it up the middle and then combine it and create another creature like another human being not a creature a human being.   Zack Jackson 08:46 Not just a random,   Rachael Jackson 08:47 just some random   Zack Jackson 08:49 person chances   Rachael Jackson 08:52 are like that question. So I, I carried my child. And so when I was pregnant with him, people would say so what are you having? And like, That's such a weird question. It's like a dinosaur. I'm having a Stegosaurus like. This is like, I don't know if Nicole has a question. Or if you ever had that question on her behalf   Zack Jackson 09:14 a time people are so preoccupied with unborn fetuses, genitals, it's unsettling.   Rachael Jackson 09:21 Yes. Like, what else? Do we ever talk about it? Like really? When Elsa read or, or worse? So are you going to have another? Like, when else do we casually talk about people's sex lives? Like that is literally none of your business. It would be like asking the question, so are you and your partner having unprotected sex tonight?   Zack Jackson 09:45 Yeah, anytime a couple says like we're trying for another one. That's all I think is like wow, you just told me that you and your your partner are just going to have a lot of sex. Thanks for that. I didn't need to know that.   Rachael Jackson 09:56 This is like somehow in our semi period in society, we're allowed to be that invasive and that open about this topic.   Zack Jackson 10:07 It's someone like, So, have you thought about getting a nose job? And like, you know what this is my body? Maybe we don't talk about this right now, it seems kind of.   Rachael Jackson 10:19 Right, it seems kind of not appropriate, because we're just not in that kind of relationship. And that's, that's a boundary crosser. But we, what we do we ask that question of like, so what are you having, which is a question of genitalia. And we now, in the last, I'm just gonna not go through the whole medical thing. So I'm just going to use very broad, broad decades, within the last 100 years, we've now been able to be clarified what the genitalia will be, of an of a fetus have a yet to be born fetus using ultrasound techniques, right. So plus or minus 60 years, we've been able to do this, which is pretty cool. But it doesn't really actually change anything, just FYI. doesn't doesn't change anything. But now we know. And then, within the last few decades, we've been able to do more than ultrasounds. ultrasounds give us a glimpse into what is going on. And we hopefully, focus on the genitalia. And I say hopefully, because that means everything else is fine. That means the heartbeat is going well, that means the shape of the head is forming. That means you can see the organs that are happening and forming and that the brain is going right that it's all connecting. And it's working. And if you're getting to the point where you're really excited about if it's a boy or a girl, then that means everything else is okay. And that's not always the case. That's not always the case with ultrasound. So what do we do? What do we do? But before we get to that conversation, I want to take a step back, when we're talking about recessive and dominant genes. Now we're gonna get into some odd territory to have ethnicity. So have you heard of the royal blood disease?   Zack Jackson 12:31 In royal blood disease, like in Russia? Oh, in Russia, are we talking about like, the Czar's that are so inbred that they have all these medical problems. They had a whole there was a whole stick on that on 30 rock for for a while.   Rachael Jackson 12:50 Okay. So there's there's two, there's two royal families in the European continent that are pretty famous for medical issues. One is sort of the Russian side, which is Haemophilia. Which is sort of a royal blood disease royal, because a lot of the Royals had it. And the other is the Hapsburgs where they were so inbred that it caused massive issues. And by the end of the line, the person was sterile, right, there was just so many genetic issues that the person was sterile and couldn't then have any more of their own children. And there there went the end of the line. Right, so the Habsburgs and that, so that's an inbreeding. But there's other ways of of Ashwin is the way I'm looking for, of being in relation ship in a small group without having these dramatic inbreeding issues. One of those that's fairly common that I'm mostly intimately familiar with, is the Ashkenazi Jewish list. And the reason that that exists, is Ashkenazi Jews or central or Eastern European Jews. And for a very, very long time, it was illegal punishable by death to marry a Jewish person. And it was illegal punishable by death to convert to Judaism. So what do you do with our population? Right, they just breed with each other. Luckily, the population was large enough that it didn't cause these massive inbreeding issues that we see in in some cultures or and then the Hapsburgs. But that has caused some genetic issues and genetic traits. And we know that now. And one of the things so there is this idea of genetic screening between two people and to see what is their genetic recessive disorders recessive meaning they themselves are its carrier status, right? It's, you carry this gene doesn't affect you, but you hold it. And you could pass it along to your child. And the question is, if you're holding it, and your partner is holding it, your child's 25% gonna get it. Right. Like that's. So if you're holding something and your partner is holding something, but neither one of you have it, your child will have a 25% chance of getting it,   Zack Jackson 15:30 and then a 75% chance of being a holder if they don't get it.   Rachael Jackson 15:34 But 50% chance of being a holder and a 25% chance of not even carrying if not even being a carrier. Got it? Beautiful, right? That's sort of how these things work of all genes being equal. That's how it would work. Well, the Ashkenazi Jewish population has around 100, pretty nasty diseases, some less nasty than others, right? Most are achy, but not traumatic or disastrous. So what we do is if we have an ethnically, and this is where I'm where I'm saying, It's getting a little sticky, because we recognize that people are people. And every, you know, diversity is amazing. And we want people to just love and live and Yay. But the reality is that if you have and that also, I just want to say that when a person converts to Judaism, you're Jewish. But genetically doesn't have the same gene pool.   Zack Jackson 17:01 You mentioned Ashkenazi Jews. Yes. That's not the only group. And before I met you, I didn't know this. So I imagine a lot of our listeners also don't know, these distinctive genetic groups.   Rachael Jackson 17:16 Thank you. I does, I'm so absorbed in that world that I forget that Thank you. So Ashkenazi Jews showed up in central Eastern Europe, plus or minus 1000 years ago. Right? So we'll just use that timeframe. Where else were Jews in the world about 1000 years ago, in what's considered the ancient Near East or the Middle East, or however you want to understand? Israel, Egypt, that part of the world, right? And then in the 1500s 1492, not talking Columbus talking, the expulsion of Jews, right, and these are Sephardic Jews. And that's the, that's one of the other terms, right? Sephardic Jews are those that come from Spain, or the Iberian Peninsula to be more accurate. But 500 years ago, they were kicked out of there, and they had to go somewhere. And so where did they go? They went to the Ottoman Empire or South America. So those are Sephardic Jews, as the primary differences. There's also different rights are it e Yemenite, its Iraqi, etc, those are much smaller populations, mostly coming from a mix of Sephardic and the local populations. So even the Jews that are living in India, and those were, most of them were considered Sephardic Jews, right? Because prior to the prior to the expulsion in 1492, their families came from Spain. So when we look at a genetic, when we look at from a genetic standpoint, it's really two groups of people, Sephardic, and Ashkenazi,   Zack Jackson 19:03 and the Arctic have had more intermingling outside of their own group, BINGO,   Rachael Jackson 19:09 BINGO, because Spain and Portugal was like, get out of here. And so where did they go? They spread. Right? They went to lots of different places, and they intermingled. So their genetic their gene pool was much larger. Ashkenazi, not so much, tiny little shuttles. And the entire shuttle would be picked up and move to a different place.   Zack Jackson 19:36 And so being Christians are awful,   Rachael Jackson 19:38 right?   Zack Jackson 19:40 Historically, I think that's pretty uncontested. Yeah. So   Rachael Jackson 19:44 the Jews living in those regions, then we're had a much different experience in the Sephardic Jews. So their ability to find someone to marry was challenging. Without going into all of the details of how not quite accurate This was Fiddler on the Roof. If anyone has seen that one of the challenges that tavia has is he has to marry off his daughters. And there aren't any. There aren't any suitable Jews in their city. Right. So where does he has to find them from elsewhere? Right that that that kind of challenge of like, Okay, I've got seven daughters. What do I do? And they they brought in a matchmaker. Yay. Right? And if no one's got the song, right, Matchmaker, matchmaker maker, find me a Kashmir catch. And so they did the matchmakers job and this is getting us back to the genetic question. The matchmakers job was not just to match them with someone who could produce children, someone who could keep a roof over their their heads and, you know, happiness and love sure, but that's that's a new issue. But the matchmakers job way back when, right pre pre maternity was to know this family, did they have any issues? And were there lots of issues? Did they lose children not miscarriage? But did did their children die at young ages? And knowing that piece of information and saying Ah, and I have a family over here, right? This, this, this bride's family her, her family has had all these little graves, these little baby graves, and this groom's family, his family has all these little graves for children, do not combine them. Right. And they just know that, again, they didn't understand genetics, but they knew that there was something in this family's blood that caused these issues. And if the same issues arose in someone else's gene pool or someone else's bloodline, you don't combine those people. So that have that's one of the roles of the Ashkenazi Jewish matchmaker was to make sure that those genetic issues sort of stopped with the families as much as they could. So what we do now, is we actually do genetic pre testing, test the adults. So Zack, if I can ask the personal question, did you and Nicole have this question or wrestle with this? Or did anyone even bring this up to you to have your own genetics tested?   Zack Jackson 22:41 know, a little, that would have been so strange and invasive, and no one would have ever thought to do that.   Rachael Jackson 22:51 Okay. And after you had conceived, did that even come up?   Zack Jackson 22:56 There were no I know. They they know. Like, maybe a little bit when we're thinking about like, well, heart disease runs in both of our families. So we just need to make sure we're eating right. But like, that's, that's kind of,   Rachael Jackson 23:15 right, right. For our segment of the population, we actually talk about pre genetic testing, where we say okay, if you two want if you're both genetically Ashkenazi Jewish, let's get you pre tested and see if you're a carrier, see if this is a recessive gene. One of the most famous ones that people might have heard about is Tay Sachs. And Tay Sachs is a neurodegenerative disease, basically, where there's a piece of fat, right that the brain just turns to fat, rather than being a muscle. And because it's a muscle, or should be a muscle, it controls things. And starting around six months old, it just stops. So if you've ever been around a child, an infant who's about six months old, they're not. They're just starting to develop any ability to have language, right, just as an ooze and whatever, just somehow forming things. They're just beginning to really sit up and hold themselves, right, but they're not really mobile, right? They're not crawling, they're not walking, but they're there but you can just plop them down on the floor and be like, okay, here's your key ring, have go to town, right, those plastic keys. And starting around that age with Tay Sachs, that's when it starts to become degenerative to the point of losing all muscle control, going blind, going deaf, having zero physical ability and eventually suffocating with lungs and most children die by the age of five, if not sooner, and it is a horrific death, the the dying, the degeneration is traumatic and the death itself is awful. Well, that's a sex. And that's one of several diseases that are like that. So we suggest, and that I think I have to double check with the numbers are, there's been much more intermarriage recently, which is good for the gene pool. Not gonna say how it is for the religion, but it's good for the gene pool where the numbers are going down. But I one point I looked at was something like one and 21 and Trey were carriers of Ashkenazi Yeah, huge. And if if anyone has been to an ultra orthodox enclave, there is a lot more infant graves than the general population for all these different genetic issues.   Zack Jackson 25:53 So are people getting people are getting tested before they get married?   Rachael Jackson 25:56 Correct. So they can see if they're right, are you a carrier? And if you're not a carrier, okay, then Hmm.   Zack Jackson 26:06 I like if, if you were to get tested before you got married, and you found that you're both carriers, right? Like, would that change your decision to get married at all?   Rachael Jackson 26:19 What do you think? What would you do?   Zack Jackson 26:24 I think, well, if I'm back when I was getting ready to get married, I think I could have found out that Nicole was, you know, secretly, a Martian, or she had a disease where her hair would catch on fire every 10 years or something. And I would still probably if married her and be like, well figure it out down the line, I don't care that you've been cursed by a witch or something. That's futures x problem. Right? Right. Because has Zach was puppy dog love, and so I wouldn't have cared later down the line, though. You know, as time went on, and we thought about kids and thought, like, that's just gonna be, that's gonna be so dangerous, potentially. I don't know if I want to do that. And then maybe we'll have felt regret. I don't know. This is this is all brand new thought experiments to me.   Rachael Jackson 27:13 So let's keep going with that thought experiment. Right? So let's say you do get married. Because love triumphs and love is amazing. And kids don't make marriage, right. Marriage is its own entity. And so you can say, Yes, we choose to start a family. Turns out, we don't want to do that to us. Right. Very few people, I think would say, Oh, I'm a carrier and my partner's a carrier. Let's try it. Those are good odds. No, those are not good odds. Those are bad odds, because the result is so bad. So the answer is no, let's not do this, quote unquote, the natural way? Well, let's say you're just so tied to seeing those ticks in your kids to knowing that your kid is like you, genetically, that you're just tied to that idea. So what are some options? Right, exactly. You know, what, what are your options?   Zack Jackson 28:17 No, I would have no idea. I mean, if both partners are carriers, yeah. I mean, we don't have the technology to like, isolate and splice out those Sure   Rachael Jackson 28:26 do. What should we do?   Zack Jackson 28:29 No, we do not.   Rachael Jackson 28:31 Here's what we do have Stop it. We have the ability to create zygotes where you take a sperm and you take an egg in IVF. Right. So you make the woman like, okay, so just a little bit of medical technology. And sorry, I'm dominating the conversation. Take a little bit of technology.   Zack Jackson 28:49 I glad it's not me dominating the conversation about pregnancy and, and Jewish genetics. Very appropriate that way. Thanks. So Turkey,   Rachael Jackson 29:01 generally speaking, a woman oscillates and yields one egg per monthly cycle. Right. And then if things if, if intercourse happens at that time, and everything is right, then there's pregnancy that's able to happen. But you don't want to just take one at a time when you're trying to do IVF. You want a whole bunch, so you just like load the woman up with hormones and all these other things. And then you go in and you grab a whole bunch of eggs at the same time. It's like, I got 10.   Zack Jackson 29:38 I can't help but imagine like a farmer, right? We're doing picking chicken eggs,   29:43 bacon, chicken eggs. That's right.   Zack Jackson 29:45 This is all very scientific,   Rachael Jackson 29:47 tinier, tiny little pinchers, right. You take all of these, and you take the sperm and you take you take a sperm and you're just like, Hi, meet your partner, and they come together in a petri dish. Or test to write test two babies. And we've had that technology 40 ish years, right? And now what but the sperm and the egg get together and you're just like, Oh, it's so beautiful. Let's make more of us. And they go from that one to two to four to eight and then pause. you pause everything at eight cells.   Zack Jackson 30:20 What do you mean, you pause it,   Rachael Jackson 30:21 you stop the reactions from continuing you stop that. You freeze them. Like I don't, I don't know the science behind it.   Zack Jackson 30:30 Like actually freezing them in and like it like   Rachael Jackson 30:33 you just like you put it like you put it in spaces. That's not the right word. But like, you just stop the reaction.   Zack Jackson 30:40 This is all science fiction to me. So   Rachael Jackson 30:41 you go. And then you take one of those eight cells. You do this, lots of sperm, lots of eggs, and you take one of those eight cells, and you look at it and you say, Alright, this is going to tell me all of the genetics of the future fetus and child. Oh, yeah. And you can say, Ah, this child will have Tay Sachs, this child will have cystic fibrosis, this child will have brown eyes, brown hair, generally be tall will have no heart disease will be male. And 1/8 of a set 1/8 of this will tell you that and then you say, ah, I've taken a look. I know that this one doesn't have a six it doesn't have any genetic disorders. Fantastic. let it continue to grow. Let me pop it in your uterus, or a surrogate unit uterus if yours is not a good place to grow things. And then you grow the child's and you're fine.   31:42 Helmets off.   Zack Jackson 31:44 So wait.   Rachael Jackson 31:46 I'm blowing Zach's mine. Okay, so I know that I know that audio and Zach's head is like literally flooded?   Zack Jackson 31:53 I know, we should have been recording the video and smacking into my microphone and everything. Yeah. Okay. So you get a bunch of bunch of fertilized eggs. And, and then the doctor says to you, all right, we've got 16 here, and seven of them are with are not going to have k sex? Do you then get the choice? Like, do you want a boy? Do you want a girl? Do you want to tall kid a short kid? Or are they sequencing the full genome are just looking for those markers?   Rachael Jackson 32:27 And that's where this becomes an ethical question. Where are we asking? We I believe I Rachel believe that when we say I don't want the trauma. And I know I'm using that word again. And the tragedy of bringing a life into this world only to see it suffer and die. And we are preventing that. And that is amazing. And I completely support that. I think we should use our technology in those ways. The question then becomes, how much information do you get? Because yes, generally speaking, when you're doing the Royal you, when you're doing these investigations of the genome, it's all found, you know, what gender you know what sex it is, you know, what? hair color and all of these other things that we have genetic markers for, you know what those are, and they test for them all. And so you can have this picture of what this child could look like. And so the question becomes, okay, now you have four, three are male, and one is female. Which do you implant? Who gets that choice? Should anyone get that? Drake's? What do you think?   Zack Jackson 34:14 This is where it'll be really helpful to have more guests on the show.   Rachael Jackson 34:19 Put the pressure off of you.   Zack Jackson 34:24 Yeah, right, take the pressure off of me because it's somehow feels different when we're talking about minimizing suffering and death and weeding out something like Tay Sachs, or something else that would inevitably end in suffering and death. And then there's like the next level down, where it's like this could potentially cause suffering and death. So like markers for heart disease, or diabetes or something like that. That is may cause suffering down the line. But it's it's kind of your baseline average it sucks to be human suffering. And then there's like things that won't really affect that. But maybe the family ones that are more cosmetic, you know about height and, and weight and hair color, hair color, eye color, things like that. And then there's like this whole other category of things that are like, would cause social suffering, right? Like, you might say, Wow, it is much better to be born a man in this day and age. So if I have a choice, I'm going to raise somebody who's going to be able to get ahead easier in the world, and be like, I'm worried. So we're gonna have a son to pass on our name and get a good job, we'll make him tall, tall, dark, handsome, as best as we can. And set him up for success. And then that feels like a different ballgame that feels like custom humans and but not custom humans in the way of like designing a genome and then spitting out something. But custom humans in a sort of process of elimination, wasteful kind of a way that then feels like if we're fertilizing a bunch of eggs, and only keeping the healthy ones, because we're trying to minimize suffering and death, for some reason that feels morally better than creating a bunch just so that we can find the one that's the best, that feels a little more shady. For all of the nerds out here, my my brain is immediately going to all of those hours I spent breeding Pokemon and Pokemon field recently on switch, and putting two in there catching an egg checking to see how strong it is, and then releasing it into the wild, hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of strays running around the world right now because I wanted to find the perfect one. And now when I kept and trained, and I even in a video game I felt a little dirty about   Rachael Jackson 37:09 that's good. I think that means your ethics is kind of in check. But those are the questions that people face every time they go through this process.   Zack Jackson 37:21 Yeah. And so then created, they're not intentionally,   Rachael Jackson 37:25 right. And then the question becomes, who gets to decide if there is a decision to be made? Again, so let's let's just agree that the suffering the immediate and error, irreversible or blanking on the word, guaranteed suffering and death, that were just that those, those are just not going to be implanted? Right? We just, we just, that's part of the reason for doing this, right? We're just saying, okay, no, but now we've got four healthy ones. And let's keep it at a reasonable number for that you implant to now and then you can have a sibling later and implant to in a couple of years. Right. But if you have more than that, like, who's making the decision? Is it the parents? Is it the doctor who's doing the implantation? Is it the geneticist who found this information? Right, so from my perspective, we can we have to have layers of trust and layers of ignorance. We where the trust is we trust the geneticists finds the ones that would cause suffering, and said, these ones, these ones aren't going to be good, right? To use a very subjective term. These five are great. And I'm not going to tell you anything more about it. And then the doctor, the implanter, and the parent say, Okay, I've got five good eggs. How many do you want to try now? And that's all that that's all they know. It creates a barrier, but then we'd need to check and balance with the geneticist to make sure that the genetic so then the geneticist doesn't have any say into Oh, well did. The geneticist really likes girls that the geneticist really likes brown hair, right there, that's what's good or bad.   Zack Jackson 39:22 Right? And then years down the road, there's gonna be some big breaking story about this geneticist who was like a white supremacists, right. patriarchy guy who's been intentionally implanting only men   Rachael Jackson 39:36 for why they're only boys, right? The rest are bad, right? So there has to be some sort of check in that situation of what's identified and someone to then audit using a bookkeeping term, right to audit what this geneticist is doing. So in Judaism, the answer is at this point, right because we have questions and answers called Holocaust. response and response basically says, if it's going to be suffering and death, don't implant them and just destroy the embryos. Other than that, anything other than that heart disease, Down syndrome, right, diabetes, things that just naturally occur that might make it harder in society. No, you don't get to abort, or you don't get to choose to not implant those ones for those reasons. You say, yeah, I've had enough kids. The difference in Judaism, which I personally disagree with some of this is from a gendered standpoint, or a sex standpoint, where if you already have two boys, you're allowed to choose a female one. Or if you already have two females, you're allowed to choose a male one, to ensure a balance in your nuclear family. So that's, that's sort of where the Holocaust rests.   Zack Jackson 41:06 Okay, it feels like a concession that someone made,   Rachael Jackson 41:08 right. But it's, it's exactly that you get a little bit more, because if you if if this if you're both carriers, and you want to have multiple children, and you're like, Ah, well, I've already had two boys. Make sure that this one's a girl, then they can. Mm hmm. So, but now let's, let's get forward on your ethics. Let's say you don't go through that testing, like the majority of people don't. And you're pregnant. Yay. Yay. And you have an ultrasound and something's not Yay. And they ask the question, do you want an amniocentesis? Or do you want some other genetic testing of the fetus and amniocentesis is basically where they go into the belly, and into the amniotic fluid, take some of the fluid out and test that fluid, which means that they're puncturing the amniotic sac, which is basically the baby's life. Yeah, right. So if they puncture it, and something goes wrong, there's a 1% chance of miscarriage at that point, which is a decently high percentage, for a question mark, right, of what's going to come from this. So what do you do then?   Zack Jackson 42:24 defer 100% to my wife. I feel like with most of these decisions that have to do with childbearing and, and the creation of life, that these decisions should be made by the one carrying the life and fostering the life much more than the person who had a little bit of say in the beginning. But I think at the end, I know what what she would say would be, okay, well, what what are we going to do with the information we get? And are we considering terminating the pregnancy? If we find that it's something awful? And if that's the case, then it's worth taking the chance? If we're not going to terminate the pregnancy, that it's not worth taking the chance? And we'll see what happens.   Rachael Jackson 43:21 Yeah, exactly. I think that's wonderful way of looking at it. If you ask the question, what do you do with the answer? If the answer is nothing, right, that you're doing nothing with the answer that you receive, then why ask the question   Zack Jackson 43:35 is just for peace of mind.   Rachael Jackson 43:39 Great, like, why? Right? Nobody asked that question. Nobody had the ability to ask that question. 100 years ago, right, didn't have that ability. So why is the question now if you're not going to do anything about it? which then gets us to the religious side of things. So Zack, if you could tell us about the various stages of what life is like, when does life happen? When does a soul happen? When does like in your tradition? When do those pieces happen?   Zack Jackson 44:21 Well, the various strands of Christianity are all over the place, as is true with almost anything. I came from a church that taught very strictly that life, human life begins at conception, at the moment that the sperm enters the egg and they do their little dance, and there is a single cell. Or maybe when that single spouse splits into two, that's when life exists. That's when there is a soul present. That's when this is a human being and anything you do to That human being in that womb, that would be equated to what you would have done to a person, an adult human. Essentially. We were that church who protested at Planned Parenthood and had awful giant banners of aborted fetuses and just leave without those people. And I'm horrified now. That tradition I'm in now, the United Church of Christ is kind of work. congregational denominations, every church is allowed to do their own thing. But from a national standpoint, they would say that life begins when a child is on their own, when a child is out of the mother, and is able to live by their own means.   Rachael Jackson 45:56 Almost a medical definition then, right? Yes, is it it's a viable, that it's viable,   Zack Jackson 46:01 that it's viable on its own. So after, after birth, essentially. So we're not talking like, you know, 36 weeks or whatever, but like, after the child is out on their own, then they are a, a life, and we just, we don't bother ourselves with the question of souls, entering bodies and whatnot. One person, I pointed out that up to 14 days, a, an embryo can still become twins. And so after 14 days is when the soul enters the body, because then you'd need two souls, if it was going to be twins. And so that's the moment that it happens. And when I heard that, it said, I thought to myself, this whole thing feels very arbitrary. Like, we are really trying to shove very ancient, almost mystical ideas about how the physical and the spiritual intermingle in what makes humans special from animals. And we are trying to shove that now into scientific understandings of life. And it gets messy, and then we pretend like it's not messy, and that makes it nastier.   Rachael Jackson 47:32 Is there a differentiation of something which is alive, and something which is a human life?   Zack Jackson 47:44 modern progressive Christians would say, Yes. That though, like a tissue in the uterus, is alive on its on its own, it is also so heavily connected to the mother, that it is, in some sense, a part of it. And is is just is not a human being as itself an autonomous being. Just definitionally, I mean, my own perspective, is that I try not to have a perspective because it's not my body. And I would rather listen to the people who have those bodies and have those experiences to tell me what is happening within them.   Rachael Jackson 48:31 Although I will push you on that and say that, especially as a, as a man, being an ally, is also important. And so to understand where your ally ship feels in accordance with your morality is important. But I appreciate that I applaud the idea that the person who's making these decisions as the person going through these decisions themselves,   Zack Jackson 48:59 it also helps that I no longer have a, an individual theology of a human soul. Which then kind of changes a lot of the conversation. Like if you believe that there is an immaterial spiritual thingness that resides within you, and without you, that enters into you, or is formed into you, and then once you die is freed, to continue its everlasting life in whatever afterlife, like that idea, which honestly, is a bit more Hindu than biblical. This is the Atman we're talking about more than what the Bible would talk about as a spirit, a soul, a life a person or whatever. And I mean, when I say Bible, I mean both Christian and Hebrew Bibles. A lot is read into it. I think what the the the Christian Bible Promises is a resurrection of humanity. That the dead ur dead, ur dead are dead. And that the promises not that they die and then are washed away in some ethereal state. But the promise is that the God who remembers them will resurrect them and give them new life here on earth with a physical Earth and a physical garden and trees and wildlife and all those things, there's not really a promise other than in a couple of isolated places, in Paul's writings that talk about being freed from this mortal coil. There's not really a whole lot of indication of an individual eternal soul that is present with in a person, despite the fact that it's so present within Christian theology historically, it's not really biblical. And so if you no longer have that hinderance theologically speaking, then this question becomes a lot more scientific. Like if that if that embryo that is growing into a fetus, as growing into a child within the womb is does not have an eternal essence to it. It doesn't have a them that is them that is then that is them yet, then it's an entirely different ethical question, then it is that thing, a, a divine, a carrier of the Divine?   Rachael Jackson 51:23 Yeah, that's beautiful. Thank you for, for adding to that I've not really thought about it in in those ways. That also   Zack Jackson 51:31 might get me in trouble. So I'm sorry, all of you who are listening, who are a member of my church, don't tell anyone. All three of you.   Rachael Jackson 51:42 And I'll just say, gay Judaism, big   Zack Jackson 51:51 man,   Rachael Jackson 51:52 because we basically have this idea that there are so we don't just stick to the Bible. The Bible just influences other conversations such as the Tom Budd, which is really just 2700 pages of people arguing with each other. And what does this mean? And what does this mean, and going on from there, and in these pages, one of those examples, basically says, there's this, this I got, I just got, I just got to actually share the share the line, right, so we've all heard, and a hammer Robbie's code, right? An eye for an eye, a tooth for tooth and iron for a lar, or a limb for a limb a life for a life. And there's so many ways of answering What does that mean? You know, it's like God's revenge. And then the answer is, actually, it's proportionality. And another is actually it's just talking five different kinds of damages and using the body as an example of that. Yeah, that's that's like, Torah gymnastics right there. So we, we still have that, right. So if you keep that in mind, and that that's written down in the Bible, right, written down in the Old Testament, and then there's this line in Exodus 21. Exodus 2122. For anyone that would like to check on me. It says, If men strive together, right, so you got a bar brawl going on? Right? just let's just set the scene. I'm just gonna quote the whole thing. You got a bar brawl? Right? The bar brawl happens. And this woman comes out and says, Come on, has been Time to go home. Like you got to get work in the morning. She's just like, walking up there and she's pregnant. And and like a fight ensues and the non husband accidentally kicks her and hurts her. And she miscarries. Right. And that's it. Like nothing else. She's not even bruised in the ribs. She doesn't have a scrape on her knee. She just miscarries caveat parents medical aside, it's not just a miscarriage, it can be very traumatic. I am so sorry if that's ever happened to you. I honor that challenge. That's not the point of this conversation. But I want to recognize that miscarriages are not just miscarriages. Close parentheses. So she's fine otherwise, physically. So then they say, Oh, hey, you damaged my fetus. You owe me money. The person who did the damages What is he supposed to do? And it says, yet no harm follow, he shall surely be fined according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him and he shall pay as the judge determines because the only harm came to the loss of the fetus, not to her, but it's in the same same category as a limb for a limb alive. For a life, but it was a miscarriage. And the person who caused it is not paying with any body part, including his life from that lie and there is the not so far leap of, therefore the fetus is not a life. Hmm. It had potential hay, that could have been a boy that he could have worked in the farm and you owe me for that damages, you hurt my cow, you hurt my property, and therefore you owe me for the damages of my property. But it is not a life. And it's from that line that more than that, that our understanding of So when is this life thing happening. And there are other lines that I won't go into the gruesome nature of what they talk about, basically, it says up to 40 days, it's like water. So 40 days, which, scientifically speaking, you know, it's about six weeks. So if anything happens before six weeks, whatever, like, it's just like water, like there's literally nothing else, or we're not even going to do anything if if a miscarriage or an abortion, a spontaneous or an intentional miscarriage happens, great man gonna do anything about that. And then comes that other period of it's still really attached to the female that it is living within as a parasite. Loving pregnant, totally a parasite,   Zack Jackson 56:50 your bones,   Rachael Jackson 56:51 Oh, my God. Again, loved it was not was not did not feel like   Zack Jackson 56:58 my calcium child,   Rachael Jackson 57:00 and my blood supply and my brain cells, please go on. Thanks for that. That it is not considered a nephesh it is not considered a soul a life until the moment that the entire head is outside of the body. At that point, when the entire head is outside of the body, then the life of the person delivering it and the life of this child, this infant are now equal. Up until that point, it is considered as a limb of the mother. So if you imagine a limb, and you're just like, this limb has become gangrenous, I must get rid of it. Okay, let's get rid of the limb. If your life is in danger, because this limb is going to cause you death, then you get rid of it. It is considered and so using that language that it is as a limb, I think really changes, who owns it? Who makes the decision? And what can happen to it. I know this is all new for you, do you care to react?   Zack Jackson 58:25 And it sounds like it's being treated like a person who would trample on seedlings. And the question then is do you are you then guilty of destroying my tomatoes? Or just with the things that would one day bear tomatoes? Yeah, and that's a distinction I hadn't really considered. And coming from a place like that. Yeah, Exodus. That was, I came out of left field. Because we in the evangelical world, we would often quote from especially from Psalms from some of the more poetic places of you who formed my parts. my innermost being you knew me from in my mother's womb on all of these, this language of personal autonomy before birth and intentionality of creation. And all of those were used to, to give autonomy to the thing before it's born. So it's really interesting to hear that the people who wrote those books, interpret them differently than the people who inherited them. Which is so often the case so are doing Christians and Jews.   Rachael Jackson 59:44 So So holding that holding that idea of of imbuing all of these characteristics into something that is not yet born. Here's a piece from the mission of then that I'll share with you and this is trigger warning. It's a little bit graphic and used as hyperbole, okay? Because they didn't actually enforce capital punishment. But this is using that example to highlight and underscore what they're saying. So, in the case of a pregnant woman who is taken by the court to be executed, the court does not wait to execute her until after she gives birth. Rather, she is killed immediately. But with regard to a woman who is taken to be executed, while sitting in the throes of labor, on the on the birthing stool, the court shall wait to execute her. And then the following conversation is, well, isn't it obvious that the court executes a pregnant woman rather than waiting? After all, it's just a part of her body, the fetus is considered her property? If so, the courts should wait until she gives birth before executing her and not cause him to lose the fetus. And this is no actually this is not taken into account at all. So who gets so a woman who is pregnant, who is meant to be murdered by the state right? capital punishment? Yes. Up until the point where she is in active labor, on the birth. And so for those of you that are aren't so familiar with midwifery, on the birthing stool means the woman is pushing. She's not just in labor, like she is pushing, and that baby's head is like coming out. Only until that point, they can execute her up until them   Zack Jackson 1:01:40 worth noting, too, that the mission is not a modern   Rachael Jackson 1:01:44 document. Thank you. Yes, the mission was written down approximately 1900 years ago. Yeah. So contemporary with other Christian with Christian sources that might be interpreting this in a completely different way. So that's sort of the Jewish way of understanding this.   Zack Jackson 1:02:03 Okay. Interesting, though, that it's considered a part of the mother's body and not the father's property, as I would imagine a patriarchal society would want to do that, like, don't execute her until she's given birth, because that's that child is my property is how I would imagine them back then, to be thinking, but   Rachael Jackson 1:02:19 no, and that was that was the question that came out in the gamar, which was written about 200 years later, like, wait a minute, it's his property, he should get a say, right, he doesn't. And it's like, actually, it's not his property on till it comes out.   Zack Jackson 1:02:33 Wow. So 2000 years ago, there were people saying that a woman's body is it's her body, her choice? Yeah. And   Rachael Jackson 1:02:42 it's her body. And who gets to choose? She does? Hmm. Yeah.   Zack Jackson 1:02:51 Well, the early Roman Christians got real weird about sex and REL controlling about their patriarchy. And that really went a long way into informing what Christianity in Europe would develop as for the next couple 1000 years, and we are still recovering a lot from from that. And so it's actually kind of refreshing to hear that contemporaries of early Christians, and probably some early Christians as well. We're Reading these verses and thinking about life in these ways.   Rachael Jackson 1:03:23 Yeah. So when we're thinking about life in these ways, I think it's really important for us to recognize that it's not so clear cut, that these are difficult choices, that there's no easy answers, there are no, frankly, actual answers that everyone can follow. It's right. It's not math. It's not two plus two equals four, it's that every situation is unique and of itself, and the people who are actually impacted should be the one to be making these decisions, not somebody else. And I'll just sort of use this platform to also say that lawyers and politicians have no place in the gynecological office at all, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever. They don't. They don't ever have a place that I think the only people that even dare to have a place in there is the person whose body it is their medical practitioner, and their partner. Those are the people that get a say, and no one else   Zack Jackson 1:04:37 in that order,   Rachael Jackson 1:04:38 in that order, in that order, until we come up with some other way of reproducing in that order. Yeah. So go support Planned Parenthood. Go yell at your politicians who are not choosing this who are not recognizing that and there's a few things that I'll just say that I'm going to put in the show notes. Because for those of you that have not had the experience of having yourself or a loved one or a person in your circle of concern, go through an abortion to have to make that choice. It's really easy to assign blame. And it's really easy to say what you would have done, but you've never been in those shoes. And anyone considering that choice is not taking it lightly. It's and so I just want to dispel that it's, it's never used as a birth control option. It's never used as a ploy of oops, I just forgot, well, let me just go down the street and have an abortion, right? There's no, there's no casual this to anyone that's had to make this decision. All the more. So the later in a pregnancy, this decision has to be made, the more you've heard felted kick or heard its heartbeat, or watched your own body change to accommodate this. That is not a choice that anyone wants to make. So I will be including in the show notes, some stories of people who've had to make those choices, and how they've, how they've dealt with it. Oh, I know that kind of took a serious turn. This isn't quite where we're going.   Zack Jackson 1:06:25 But I think one excellent place to land.   Rachael Jackson 1:06:28 And when we're talking about ethics, I think that that's part of our conversation is who gets to make these decisions. When we're when we're speaking ethics. And when we look at medical ethics, part of the part of the list is do no harm. Personal autonomy and resources. Right fair justice and fairness and those ways. So yeah,   Zack Jackson 1:07:01 thank you for leading us in this discussion that I'm I'm so glad it was you. And that the fact that there were so few of us here today meant that you had the space to explore that a little bit further.   Rachael Jackson 1:07:15 No thank you for doing that. And listeners please please, please tell us your your your questions. Give us your questions. Give us your your experiences that you're feeling comfortable enough to share, give us your opinions, right tell us engage us with this conversation because it's it's even more meaningful, the more we hear from you  

Episode 86 There is nothing more natural than sex. It is literally the reason why you exist! Yet despite that, we seem to have a really hard time talking about it. Our experiences with sex-ed are vastly dissimilar. Some of us learned about the biology and mechanics of sex in school while others learned of the moral horrors of "improper" sex in our religious settings. With such varied approaches and experiences with sex-ed, surely there are good ways to impart scientifically sound and spiritually uplifting lessons to our youth so that they can make healthy, informed decisions about their own bodies. How should we talk about sex? Who should be doing the talking? Is sex-ed just a clever ploy by the banana lobby to sell more bananas? Let's talk about it!  Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    Show Notes What is sex ed, from planned parenthood https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/for-educators/what-sex-education    List of resources for sex positivity: https://sexpositivefamilies.com/10-best-sex-ed-resources-for-families/   Sexuality from the UCC:  https://www.ucc.org/justice_sexuality-education/   Consent is yes means yes; video on making the analogy to serving hot tea https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZwvrxVavnQ    National Sexuality Education Standards https://siecus.org/resources/national-sexuality-education-standards/?fbclid=IwAR3lyhfcNyOc_bwS0pWvxk54DIqdrAHwbJqV4iXSgh3DZAOwyLkRw_p4ITM    Religious Institute: it is ideal for exploring our understanding of gender, sexuality, reproductive justice http://religiousinstitute.org/resource/educational-resources/   ObGyn: Is Science Anti-Transgender? 18min video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEhis4L4ohY    Male and female are binary, but people aren't | Riley J. Dennis 18min video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2MEFj8q6rg    Sex ed and sexual minorities (not cis/het) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7986966/    Legislature issues: https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/breaking-2021-becomes-record-year-for-anti-transgender-legislation The basics is that trans kids are being attacked by the government in a pretty atrocious way. The FL law that allows coaches to look at a child's genitals if they suspect they might be trans, for example, is one of the more disgusting acts... And could easily mean an increase in sexual assault of kids, cis and trans, but goodness me if we get a trans girl who likes soccer! At any rate, some of these bills are related to education and some aren't. That they're all out there also just speaks to the message that kids, who already often don't live through adolescence, are being given about their gender by the government and our society for allowing it to happen.   HPV (what is it/vaccine) https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/about-hpv.html    Initiative to reduce teen pregnancy https://www.shiftnc.org/initiatives/gaston-youth-connected    How we’re failing our students: https://nursing.usc.edu/blog/americas-sex-education/    Sex ed around the world: https://www.studyinternational.com/news/sex-education/    Sex ed in EU compared to US https://archive.attn.com/stories/7020/sex-education-europe-compared-to-united-states

Episode 85 You may be wondering if something is wrong with your podcast feed because this episode is clearly about AI when we already finished that miniseries. Well, that’s my (Zack) fault. I released the wrong episode last time and got us all out of order! Honestly, I’m impressed I made it 85 episodes without messing up the order. This episode is a sort of nice bow on the series. We break down the difference between artificial intelligence, machine learning, and deep learning. We talk about the rights of non-organic beings, whether robots can convert to Judaism, and what our creations teach us about ourselves. We'll also touch on the ethics of data harvesting and whether Google's AlphaGo computer signals the end of homo sapiens as we know it...   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    Show Notes To Read:  1) Alphago deep learning https://deepmind.com/research/case-studies/alphago-the-story-so-far 2) Alternative reading of Alphago https://www.wired.com/2016/05/google-alpha-go-ai/  3) Terminator “skynet” character https://terminator.fandom.com/wiki/Skynet 4) Defense of the skynet character: https://medium.com/humungus/in-defense-of-skynet-3fd56d04b06f 5) Engineered or Evolved: https://theconversation.com/evolving-our-way-to-artificial-intelligence-54100  6) Book (don’t read if you’re happy) https://www.amazon.com/Sparrow-Novel-Book-ebook/dp/B000SEIFGO  7) Song: machine generated,  Frank Sinatra covers Britney Spears “toxic” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbh3VAzrwh8  [the original version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOZuxwVk7TU  ] 8) Book https://www.amazon.com/Creativity-Code-Art-Innovation-Age/dp/0674988132    Transcript  This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.    Zack Jackson 00:00 Hey there, Zack here. You may be wondering if something is wrong with your podcast feed because this episode is clearly about AI when we already finished that mini series. Well, that's, that's my fault. I kind of released the wrong episode last time and got us all out of order. Honestly, I'm impressed. I made it 85 episodes without messing this up. Hooray for me. This episode is sort of nice a bow on the series though. It's a really wonderful episode, we had lots of fun with it. We break down the difference between artificial intelligence machine learning and deep learning. We talk about the rights of non organic beings, whether robots can convert to Judaism and what our creations tell us about ourselves. So without further ado, Let's get this party started. You are listening to down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are   Rachael Jackson 01:05 Rachael Jackson, Rabbi at Agoudas, Israel congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina and if I were stranded on a deserted island with a I would choose the AI computer from Star Trek next generation, Zack Jackson   Zack Jackson 01:21 UCC pasture and Reading Pennsylvania and if I were stranded on a desert island with one AI I would choose Google Assistant because no one in my life knows me better. Now   Adam Pryor 01:41 Adam Pryor, I work at Bethany College in Lindsborg Kansas. If I were stranded on a desert island with an AI. I would choose the mind uploading software from a book called mind scan, which operates as a quasi AI but allows you to then transport your consciousness into artificial bodies in other places,   Ian Binns 02:06 so I'd get the best of both. Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte. And if I had to be stranded on an island with AI, Siri,   Kendra Holt-Moore 02:19 yeah, Siri, Kendra Holt-Moore, PhD candidate, Boston University. And if I was stranded on a desert island with an AI, I think maybe at this point, I would go with our two D two because he just like always survives, you know, he gets into a lot of sticky situations and always comes out alive or always saves people who are in sticky situations and being on a desert island. That's a sticky situation. So   Ian Binns 02:48 RTD I feel like he could probably tap into the midichlorians probably see, so there you go. Maybe we are on right track here.   Zack Jackson 02:57 Thank you, Kendra. You're welcome. Not sure how that's how   Kendra Holt-Moore 03:00 I'm not sure that I agree with you. But you're welcome. Yeah, thank you.   Zack Jackson 03:06 Well, we kind of have a confusion of terms there. Ian's trying to make midichlorians from the Star Wars into artificial intelligence, when I'm pretty sure in canon, their biological. But the terms here that we've been using the past couple of weeks are a little squishy. And maybe we haven't clarified them super well. So since this is the last episode in our series on AI, we're going to kind of clarify some things and give some final thoughts for now we'll probably revisit this topic in the future since this sort of technology is just happening so quickly into our lives. And especially with the rollout of 5g, I mean, that's going to be a whole other conversation about the Internet of Things. And when you have refrigerators and toasters that are as smart as your iPhone is now the world is going to look a lot different in the next couple of years when we will definitely still be podcasting. So we want to answer a couple of questions that we ourselves have had and also tell you that we are going to be adding a q&a segment to the end of every episode. So if you have questions that you want answers if there's something from the episode that was unclear if there is a pressing question you have in your mind if you have any question what so ever that is at least somewhat tangibly tangentially connected to the podcast, then you can leave it on our Facebook page on Twitter, you can email it to admin at down the wormhole comm any way that you can get in touch with us to ask that question. We want to answer it at the end of every episode. So please send that in. But the most pressing question today. What is AI? What is artificial intelligence other than a very sappy movie from the early 2000s Well, we've kind of been using some of these terms interchangeably when we probably shouldn't have. So artificial intelligence is just an overarching term for any machine that acts like a human, or has human like intuition. So your Roomba, that's able to tell that there's a chair leg and moves out of the way, that's artificial intelligence, the computer player in Mario Kart, that's artificial intelligence, the machine that beat the championship go player, that's artificial intelligence. But there's all these different branches of it that we just need to clarify real quick. So like, at the most foundational level, you've anything that has a set of stimulus, and then response is artificial intelligence. So if you're programming something, all it needs to be is a series of if then statements. So if there's a table leg in the way, then move for your Roomba. So an example of this kind of rudimentary level, is all of the battles and Lord of the Rings. You know, when you have like 10s, of 1000s, of orcs, and humans and elves, and all of them coming at each other, that was a computer program called massive, which stands for multiple agents simulation system in virtual environment. One of those really forced acronyms backronym, right. But they're called. So what that was, was each and every one of those characters had its own set of physics, and its owns awareness of what was happening around it. And they were told, attack. And if you encounter this, then this happens and encountered that, then that happens. And so you do that on a large enough scale. And you could have 10s, of 1000s, of orcs and humans and elephants, and all kinds of things fighting each other. And the computer is determining each and every outcome based on a set of, of commands. Actually, in early renders, the humans kept on losing. And so they had to keep modifying it in in a couple of cases, when the olifants came over, over the side, the humans retreated. And they kept giving up because it was too hard, and which is such a human thing to do. So a lot of the special effects that you see are done like this. So then one step in to that, nested within that, if you think of it, like a series of nested eggs, is machine learning. And this is artificial intelligence that gets smarter, the more you use it. Basic machine learning has been around for a long time, if you've ever had to prove your human by answering a CAPTCHA, you know, show all of this, but click on all the squares that have a crosswalk. That's you are actually training an artificial intelligence by doing that, you are helping them to learn how to identify crosswalks so that that information can then be used by machines in the future to for some other purpose. This level of machine learning requires human input to say to it, this is a crosswalk, this is not a crosswalk, and then the artificial intelligence then takes it apart pixel by pixel. And enough input from humans will teach it what to look for and what not to look for. And then once it has a grasp on it, it can start doing it itself. And the more that it does it, and is confirmed that that's the right thing, the better it gets. And so this process can take months and months and months of of teaching this machine, the way that you would teach a child that this is this that is not that my local recycling plant has this incredible system driven by machine learning where it's got all these cameras and sensors, and it can tell different types of plastic. And then it can sort them with machine arms and with all kinds of fun things that they can do to then sort the plastic faster than you could with humans, which then means that it can be more profitable, and they can recycle more and be less wasteful. So like, that's pretty great. And the longer they use that system, the smarter it gets, the better it gets at determining different types of plastics and metals and whatnot. So that's great. I'm totally into that. It takes a lot of human input, though, in order to teach it. So then, the next level of nested egg of artificial intelligence is what's called Deep learning. And this is the future. This is actually the present. If you've interacted with google assistant or Siri or any kind of customer service You have likely interacted with deep learning. Deep Learning does what machine learning does, but it doesn't require humans to, to teach it first. So an example of this is Google's AlphaGo, which is a program, the supercomputer that was created to beat a human go player, the ancient Chinese game. And the thing about go is that it has, I think it's I read somewhere, it's like a million times more potential know, the difference between the potential moves in chess and the potential moves in go is more than all of the atoms in the entire known universe, there is so much, so many different moves, you can make an any different point. Whereas chess players are thinking about potential moves, a lot of times, like the best go, players are just feeling it, it's intuition for them. And so this is kind of the gold standard for teaching artificial intelligence to beat humans and to think like humans. So what they did was they they took this AI that they developed, and they had it watched 100,000 games of go. And so it's analyzing every single pixel of this, and putting it through its neural network and breaking it all apart and deciphering the rules itself. And then after 100,000 times of watching it, it had learned the rules on its own, because like it knew that this person one and this person last, and this person did this, and this criteria was met. And so it learned the rules itself, nobody had to teach it, it learned it itself. And then they set it to play against itself 30 million times, it's simulated 30 million games against an older version of itself. So it would learn for a while to get a little bit better, and then face its previous self, and then that version would get a little better, and then it would face the version before it. So it's always facing a version that it can beat, but just by a little bit. And after 30 million times, it faced the number one champion go player in the world and beat it beat him in 2017. So those, what, five years, four or five years ago, that it is for this happened for Yes, thank you for thank you for math, we're not yet in 2022. So in this case, it took no human interaction for this thing to learn and then to be able to thrive. They've got these playing old, old games from the 70s and 80s. It learned how to beat Space Invaders overnight, and just defeat the whole game without teaching it any other rules. It just lost enough times to know how to avoid things and how to time things and all of that. What this requires, however, as opposed to machine learning, and AI, in the simpler senses, is a ton of data. So this required 10,000 100,000 games of go, it had to watch in order to figure out the rules of the game. So if we have a ton of computing power, and a ton of data, then we can create systems that can teach itself how to best optimize itself, and then is able to find avenues that the human mind is not able to find. So this is where we are now, which obviously there are some issues with because if you're not being very careful about the data that you're feeding it, then the output is going to end up being potentially skewed. On the other hand, because we're not intentional about which we're not giving it specific data sets, we're giving it everything, it's able to make patterns that maybe we wouldn't have otherwise, it's already proven to be so effective at locating cancer cells of predicting stock movements, which is causing all kinds of issues, was one of the reasons why the GameStop stock went crazy was because humans out out, bought the algorithm and then crashed the stock market basically for a while. It's also one of the things that's contributed to the crazy gerrymandering that we have now, because the computer is able to run every simulation of every election we've ever had against population data and then determine the ideal gerrymandered district for how population growth is going to go and immigration and all of that to make sure that their people stay in power. So like there's a lot of potential in this kind of technology. To be amazing, like, imagine a shirt that was able to sense your body temperature and your sweat, and the temperature and the forecast and then to be able to adjust its fit, depending on your particular comfort level. So like the person who's like, I'm always cold, they don't have to be always cold anymore, because your shirt knows you, and it loves you, and it wants you to be warm and comfortable. But at the same time, there's all kinds of potential issues where it'll still smell bad. It'll say, Well,   Rachael Jackson 15:33 I was thinking about how to wash your shirt like that,   Kendra Holt-Moore 15:35 unless it's merino wool. Unless it's what will Marina will?   Zack Jackson 15:40 Sorry, is that fancy? Well, which I don't know? Well, yeah. Well, resistant, very, I'm a simple man,   Kendra Holt-Moore 15:45 I've been preparing for backpacking this summer. And that's. So an example of issues with big data.   Zack Jackson 15:58 Okay, so all of these companies that are trying to teach computers how to talk and to communicate with humans, naturally use these huge language models, where they take communications from spoken communications from television, and radio, and podcasts even and, and they take written communications from websites and emails and text messages. And they create models of the English language, let's say, and, and then are able to do the sort of predictive texts that you see, or Google is able to translate websites just in a snap. There are some concerns. And one of the couple of months ago, the head of Google's ethics team co authored a paper that her name is timnit gebru. And she co authored a paper for conference, questioning some of the ethics behind this because if you're just gathering data, just haphazardly, because you need a ton of data to make this kind of system work. If you're just gathering it from everything, and you know, Google, the Google algorithm has access to every google doc and every email and everything that you have ever used on their system they have, that algorithm can access whenever it wants to, if you're just taking all of that in order to learn the English language, and you're not taking into consideration prejudices and violence and the awful things that make humans human, then you have the potential to create an algorithm that will say have implicit bias built into it the way that humans have it built into us, because it's just the air we breathe. And so she questioned in this paper, that not specifically calling out Google but IBM and Microsoft and everyone else that's doing it. And Google demanded that she retract her name from it. And when she refused, because she wanted to know who exactly it was that was censoring her, and why they were censoring her and what she's allowed to say in her position and what she's not. They fired her, though, they said they told everyone that she quit. Yeah. And she has said many times, I did not quit you, I say you fired me, I don't work there anymore. And I didn't quit. That means you fired me. And they still kind of refused to acknowledge that they fired her over questioning this kind of potential issue with data. And so that's not a good look for Google. Because they are, this is kind of their business. They're in the business now of big data and predictive tax, and they need to be on top of it. And it's a threat to their bottom line if if people start questioning the ethics of it, and they start opting out of that. So that raises all kinds of issues about oversight about trusting capitalist systems to self correct for morality, versus government systems for that as well. The potential for a self learning machine to become smarter than us and realize it doesn't need us or the potential for it to fill in all of the gaps of our weaknesses and help to create a utopian society. It seems like the future is wide open and we are at a transitional tipping point right now. And that is my long intro into all things AI and machine learning and deep learning and the fear and the optimism of the future.   Ian Binns 20:08 So can I ask a question? No, you just don't want to do anymore. All of the it sounds like even, you know, maybe from the initial beginning of things that is still depends on human input in some way to to then get things going. Is that accurate?   Zack Jackson 20:28 But like humans have to create it,   Ian Binns 20:31 either and create and then started on the learning process until they started doing it on its own, like from the the initial outset. Like it doesn't start on its own right.   Rachael Jackson 20:44 I don't think anything does doesn't I mean, started jumping? No. Doesn't does anything start on its own? Or like, your father? Did your children start on their own? That that,   Ian Binns 20:57 that that topic will come up in a later episode, Rachel, you know, it is. Not that they   Rachael Jackson 21:09 came into existence on their own, but that, as you're raising them, they don't just know what you expect of them. Right. And so for me, I don't know why we would expect anything different at this point until AI creates its own AI. And perhaps that's because I was watching Agents of SHIELD where AI is creating AI and I just want to cry. And how the sort of sci fi horror that comes with that. But I think, for me, the analogy is absolutely each one of those things, right? It's very much a parent child relationship for for those circles within circles, how much input is someone giving it? Or how much are you just being taught to do on your own, and a whole lot of garbage in garbage out?   Ian Binns 21:55 But I guess what I'm saying is, is that I guess, where I'm trying to go with this is that being that it always like, even if AI gets advanced enough to the point where it can create its own AI, the initial AI still had to be depend on human input to get going.   Rachael Jackson 22:14 Yes, all of our biases, all of our motives, all of our garbage, is my point is going to be a part of it until somebody teaches it or trains it to remove it in my opinion.   Adam Pryor 22:25 But I think that's what's terrifying about deep learning. Is that it Yeah, it's not reliant on that. Like, so this is what this is what's notable about the AlphaGo experiment, right? So this this experiment where they're playing go, right, so like, it's not just that AlphaGo beat Lisa doll, it beat Lisa doll three times in a row. And the second time it beat Lisa doll, it made a move that no go player thought was a good move. He made a totally novel move, it's in fact changed the way that go players play by analyzing this game. So okay, it took it. So like, mathematicians will describe this in terms of like a local maximum. Right? Go players had reached a local maximum in the landscape of potential go moves that one could make. And everyone thought that was the highest point AlphaGo utterly creatively changed the strategy by which the game is played. It found a new maximum in the landscape of possibilities. Right, that that's the piece of deep learning that it was not relying on human beings. Okay. It was not taught to do it. It was a completely novel structure structure that it came up with vinted on its own.   Ian Binns 23:46 Yes. all on its own. Like it. This was not from analysis. Nope. of Oh, I, you know, the thing was able to remember a move in the past this was told this was a totally novel move. That's really interesting,   Zack Jackson 23:59 right? That's what the old ones like Watson, when they're playing chess, they would look at the board and all possible moves, and then would plan ahead for all possible moves like three times in the future. That is kind of rudimentary machine learning. This one got creative.   Kendra Holt-Moore 24:17 But that creativity, I mean, I don't know that that creativity still is based on what the AI has learned from humans. It's not that the novel move. Yeah, maybe like humans had never done that before. But it's like a process of elimination of what didn't work that humans had done. And so the novelty is still sort of playing in opposition to human.   Adam Pryor 24:46 No, it's because that would be so that would be that would be a machine learning instance, right. That would be where there's a set algorithm, it analyzes all of the potential moves that would be available and then chooses the best one. Right.   Kendra Holt-Moore 25:01 But what is the best case one is one that was never chosen.   Adam Pryor 25:04 But in this case, it's not working that way. It's modifying the algorithm.   Ian Binns 25:08 And that's where the deep learning comes into play.   Kendra Holt-Moore 25:12 Okay, yes. That's creepy. Yeah, okay. Well, that that kind of.   Adam Pryor 25:18 I mean, it is still like children, though. I mean, like, I think that's still like a good like an out like, right, like, but there comes a point, right? Where those children start making decisions on their own. Right? utterly independent of the places from which they came. Deep Learning is rapidly approaching that place, and if not already crossing over into it.   Rachael Jackson 25:38 And just like with children, or, you know, I'm not I'm not saying children as in a particular age set, but the parent child relationship, looking at them going, you know, you can have that moment of like, wow, where did that come from? That I'm now seeing you. It's no longer what I'm teaching you and you're a being back to me. It's like this was you. And then there can be that moment of like, Oh, my God, what is this? Like, what did I create? And where is this coming from? Like, the, the parents of psychopaths, like I did not create that. They did that all on their own. So I, again, I really like the analogy that a where we are with AI and deep learning and all the concentric circles is still really a parent child relationship.   Zack Jackson 26:27 This has this has a very Genesis three feel to it. Yeah, we're like, God creates these creatures that have advanced knowledge and gives them a set of of do this, don't do that. But I'm gonna let you go and learn on your own. And then   Rachael Jackson 26:43 I want to be God to let me eat this apple.   Ian Binns 26:46 That does make me think about Skynet from Terminator. And when you really think about it right there, they wanted to pull the plug on Skynet, because they realized this guy that was learning on its own, and becoming better, like learning faster and becoming dangerous to humans. And so they tried to pull the plug. But by then it was too late.   Adam Pryor 27:06 I mean, like, this is the thing to me. Right? Like, Skynet is like the, the, like the best example of this, right? Because the only thing human beings have going for us is that we're better at structuring context. Right? We are never going to win the like data processing game. Computers have beat us out on that for a long, long, long time. And it's only the distance is only growing further. Right? It's, it's when you reach this point with deep learning that algorithmic systems produce better analyses of context than humans do. Which is really what Skynet does, right? Like it's it's gathering all this data, and then suddenly can produce a better vision. Right, of what the original outcome that it sought, is then what? Humans you know, what our key was, okay?   Ian Binns 28:04 Or like Vicky from iRobot? Ah, yeah, that's a good example. That would be a really good example of realizing to Vicki, I think there's even a part in that film. Where, Vic, like, when they realize that the one who's been doing this bad stuff the whole time was Vicki. And she talks about, I think, something like realizing that humans were unable to do these things for themselves. And so Vicki felt like it was time for me to take over. Because humans are too dangerous, and all that kind of stuff. And then it just, yeah. All the problems that exists because of humans. So let me take over and I'll fix everything by killing.   Kendra Holt-Moore 28:43 Nice. But yeah, but also rational. Yeah, yeah. Oh, no, just this conversation is making me rethink. Or maybe not rethink, but I'm just wondering about, like, the usefulness of this frame, like comparative framework that someone published an article, I think it was in Scientific American, or somewhere, I can look and send that to Rachel, but he's a scientist and was talking about, like, the way to think about AI. It's something that has evolved or like, is evolved, rather than engineered. And that, you know, I think, sort of like colloquially, especially for people who aren't scientists making robots, we think our like gut reaction is like, oh, someone made that someone like engineered this robot to perform this function. And that that, you know, Like, on some level is true, but it's not actually the end game of AI in like the grand scheme of, like what humans are trying to do with AI, it given our conversation about, you know, the, the, the goals of like being better and better with each generation of AI. Like they're vastly outpacing a lot of our, like human abilities already. And that's just like continuing to happen at greater degrees. And so there is an evolution, like, have these things. It's always been that way. But I guess like the the main point of that comparison between, like evolution versus engineering is that thinking about AI, in terms of evolution, is more like thinking about human intelligence, and, like the evolution of human ness. And that there's something very similar, maybe, like, eerily so that robots are, you know, that's like what we're doing. And I think that the example that I think it was Rachel, who a few minutes ago, like, brought up the kind of analogy to like a child, or like that parent child relationship that, you know, there is like a starting like a baseline of what AI is and what it knows. But if you have to have like mechanisms in place for it to, to grow and learn and that simple Engineering Task, where you're creating a thing to solve issue a, there's not an an implied, like, growth are like evolution factor in a simple Engineering Task. I mean, it can be but not always. And so I just, I think that's really interesting, because I, I just, like, evolution. Like, I guess I'm struggling always with, like, what the morality of like, what, what are the implications of this? the morality of AI, because I'm, like, thinking about the evolution of AI. And in that one day, it's just gonna like, or, you know, apparently, I've been misunderstanding robots. And it's already like creatively coming up with novel solutions. that evolution is kind of this like, opportunistic, amoral system. I guess that's how I think about it. And so whether you're talking about AI in terms of engineering, or evolution, you still have these like social political issues. And that doesn't go away. And it's a little concerning, because I think that, like some scientists will see themselves as outside of that problem. Like, science for the sake of science, seeking the truth, uncovering whatever is before us, whether that's good or bad. And there's something really exciting about that ideal, but like, it's out of it, we don't like live in a vacuum, and you can't, you can't, like seek that kind of big t truth without considering these other contextual factors have implications for harm and things like that, which is, you know, what we've been talking about. So anyway, that, the other thing I wanted to say is that this sort of relates to I think, one of the first episodes we recorded about personhood, and just thinking about the kinds of AI that are so much like, us, I'm just wondering about future conversations where, you know, like, we talk a lot now in the 21st century about human rights, and the importance of human rights. And, you know, we're there are a lot of people who always have but, you know, now these groups, you know, look in different forms of like, animal rights, and, you know, like, hardcore, like veganism and things that are trying to, like, bring animals into the picture and, you know, reevaluate, especially the ways that the West treats nature. And I just am really curious about how robots are gonna make us reconsider even the value of like, human or animal this and like, what will be our big common denominator? Is it is it personhood? Or is it something else? Because personhood is, I think can include robots, but it's still kind of this like weird, a morphus category and human rights is just something that I think especially for like, liberals is like this big like, that's the idea. We want everyone to like, benefit from human rights. And, you know, we want to like not torture animals too. And just like how will that conversation, which is like general and really common in a lot of our circles? How will that change with those smart robots all around us?   Rachael Jackson 35:41 Zach, I want to make sure that you had some time.   Zack Jackson 35:45 I had the first 20 minutes. I was thinking the same thing about everyone else.   Ian Binns 35:58 And can we go back to the AlphaGo thing real quick? Just come just curious. So I was I found a wired article about it, right? And started thumbing through and goes back to what you're saying, Adam, that that move showed that, you know, his creativity that was able to do something that's never been done before on its own. And right here, it talks about this article I'm Reading in Wired Magazine. That particular move wasn't the moment where the machines began their rise to power over our lesser minds. That move was the moment machines and humanity finally began to evolve together.   Adam Pryor 36:37 Right, so this is that like, I mean, I think kendras thing about like, engineering versus evolution for thinking about this is really critical, like, because we do think of machines as engineered objects. Right? And that is not what is happening at this point, right? Like, what I think is like, most interesting, terrifying sort of like, is strategically helpful, potentially, about the way algorithmic learning occurs, which is really like, also, I keep using the phrase algorithmic learning, you could substitute deep learning, right? All deep learning is a form of algorithmic learning, at this point, so what's like both terrifying and potentially helpful about over an algorithmic learning is this place that it has reached, where it allows a new context for local systems to be discovered. It opens up a new way of seeing the data that sits within a given field field of analysis. Now, at least in my area of the world, academically, we might call that meaning formation. And that I think is the sort of like that wired article is I think, Reading AlphaGo, Reading the situation that occurred is AlphaGo, forming new meaning out of this particular landscape of the game. Now, is that what happened? I am a little more suspect, right? Like there's a level of intentionality and consciousness being projected. right on to that situation in order to say that machines and humans are learning together right now, are they evolving together? Right? is are we suddenly in an age where this sort of algorithmic, algorithmic deep learning means humans engage their environment in ways that previously were totally unimaginable? Yes, I'm on board with that. Like, I I'll point to this moment with AlphaGo. And say, like, that may be the moment where Homo sapiens die. If we looked at this millions and millions and millions of years from now, like that might be the demise of our species.   Ian Binns 39:24 So happy right now. I don't think that's a bad thing.   Kendra Holt-Moore 39:31 I'm not ready to die.   Ian Binns 39:34 I like my I like our species, and that I'm still alive.   Adam Pryor 39:37 I mean, the Neanderthals like their species to   Ian Binns 39:41 good fairpoint.   Rachael Jackson 39:48 You know, that's where I was thinking about this, you know, if we, if we really toy with this idea of evolution, and AI, we don't there's past 70 or so. The activity in my head, right engineering means that we are actively doing something and evolution is there's sort of a passiveness that it's that it is happening, or happens like we you just said the Neanderthals like themselves too. And yet they're not here either. And part of that is not the evolution of them, but the evolution of us. And then we killed them.   Zack Jackson 40:23 Right, right. absorb them I'm part Neanderthal, yes.   Rachael Jackson 40:30 Two 3% or something like that, right? Like, absorbed kills those things? Perhaps those things, sports, all those things like people that those things like those changes, I'm not that harsh. Right? Resistance is futile, you understand this? Right? So maybe if we initially engineered machines, machine learnings that then has with our evolution and our engineering, we're sort of making that deep learning turning into ai ai, then over X number of hundreds of years then evolves beyond where we started from. And if that then is our demise, then perhaps isn't that our homosapiens evolution? That, that we have all these branches, and it's not necessarily a fatalistic perspective, but it is much more of a geological time perspective, right, human Homo sapiens have have been around for a blink of an eye.   Adam Pryor 41:40 Not nearly as long as homo Neanderthals were around.   Rachael Jackson 41:42 Exactly. Exactly. And, and who knows how many more iterations before that, that we just don't even know about? And how long they were around? And why why do we think that us human beings are so much more specific and special that we would get to last? You know, 160 million years like dinosaurs did? In a Why? I just don't see I don't I don't have an issue with Homo sapiens no longer existing. Again, not a deathwish not saying that I want us to die now. But but recognizing that in the grand scheme of things of things on this planet, if that's if that's where we're going to go through our own evolution, then that's, that's an okay thing. It's not our demise. Like Adam is saying it's   Adam Pryor 42:38 that no, let's let's be clear, it is still our demise. No, no, I don't want to let you off the hook. That easy. Wait, there's there's demise there. There may be progress. Also. I'm okay with that. But it is still the demise of Homo sapiens.   Ian Binns 42:55 As we know it now. Yes. Okay. Great.   Kendra Holt-Moore 43:00 Thank you, demise, evolution, what's the difference? Tato. But, so to me, like, what's interesting about this,   Rachael Jackson 43:09 maybe we'll be together. Sorry, Adam. Or like, maybe it will be together?   Adam Pryor 43:13 I don't think that's gonna go well, for the like, like, not as fast thinking homosapiens we just say that hasn't traditionally gone real well, for those species, but   Zack Jackson 43:22 think about it an excellent pet way to be.   Adam Pryor 43:28 Have you read the sparrow? No. Okay. Yeah, you need to read the sparrow. And think about that before you decide you want to be a pet. I will just tell you, if you haven't read the sparrow, it is Jesuits in space. It's worth Reading.   Rachael Jackson 43:45 Is this just making sure. Mary Doria Russell, Mary Doria Russell,   Adam Pryor 43:50 yeah. Because it's brilliant. It's a brilliant book. Also, please don't read it. When you're feeling happy.   Rachael Jackson 43:57 You will not feel happy at the end,   Adam Pryor 43:58 you will not feel happy at the end of this book in any way, shape, or form. But all told, even if it is the demise of Homo sapiens, which I think it is, or, you know, a lovely vision of progress where Homo sapiens now live in a utopia with these machines. And we're not just pets. I look at this though. And I do go like, I feel like that's really challenging for religious traditions. Like I think most religious traditions have a sense of the sacredness of the human. And that gets translated to Homo sapiens. Very, very specifically. And, and I think this is sort of like an interesting place where I really do think deep learning is starting to push a boundary for religious traditions to rethink themselves. Maybe not all, but I'll at least speak from my right, like, Lutheran Christian version of this right. It's really hard for me to square any kind of eschatology that we've usually talked about in those traditions, with a vision of Homo sapiens not being permanent fixtures until the Rapture. Right? That's, that's pretty hard to square. It's, it gets kind of harder for me to sort of do a usual Christology. where, you know, Jesus Christ shows up at this very particular point in time, if Homo sapiens aren't going to be the last species of human beings on this planet. I mean, I think there are ways to do it. But but it's a, there are some creative theological questions that I think really emerge from taking this idea seriously.   Rachael Jackson 45:38 If you don't have those two things, though, right, because only some religions have those two things. Would it? Would it work?   Adam Pryor 45:49 Well, what I would say is, like, I wonder are would other religious traditions have their own questions that they have to ask in the face of this? I don't, I don't think all all of them ask the same question by any stretch of imagination, like   Rachael Jackson 45:59 I think about, from my, my corner of the world, right? I'm thinking that in Judaism, what what is the ultimate goal for for the existence of humans or the existence of Jews or the exit, right? Like what what is happening next, not the rapture, not right a second coming up. A Messianic age figure that says the world is now fully repaired, and it will continue to exist in a place of wholeness and peace. It allows for anybody to participate in that. In fact, it it requires anybody and everybody to participate. And if you were at one point, a righteous person, or specifically a righteous Jew, you then get to return in that in that Messianic age, and sort of heaven on earth, right? gun aid in the Garden of Eden, comes once more for us to live happily ever after. And there's no problem with Well, what if it's not me?   Adam Pryor 47:12 Well, but I think maybe then, so as I'm listening to you, right, like the question that would start to emerge for me in my like, philosophy of religion sort of side of things would be like, okay, so can there be a righteous Jew? That's not a homosapien? It feels like there would be internal debate about that.   Rachael Jackson 47:30 I don't actually know. I mean, only because Jews debate about everything. I mean, right. But beyond that question, my gut reaction is, why not? If we're not already limiting ourselves to dues, then we're opening ourselves to everyone. And if we're opening ourselves to everyone, then why couldn't that everyone include an AI? Maybe I'm just optimistic and positive. I don't know. Maybe I'm just in the right religion. I don't know that either.   Adam Pryor 48:27 There's nothing that brings my heart more joy than just hearing you say maybe I'm in the right religion. I'm gonna hold on to that for a while. I just I just want you to know.   Ian Binns 48:42 I say you're always optimistic to   Rachael Jackson 48:45 heavy stuff.   Adam Pryor 48:47 I would bet that there are scholars though, in different religious traditions who, who would be able to say like, there are questions in our questions or propositions or concepts within our tradition that have to be rethought in light of homosapiens not being a permanent feature into the far future.   Kendra Holt-Moore 49:10 Yeah, I think like everything that you're saying, Adam makes a lot of sense. But I I also think there's a version of like Christian eschatology and Christology that on the one hand, you're right, like people will have issues with the, you know, homosapien piece, but there's another side of that where I feel very similar to what Rachel saying, I'm like, yeah, Christians will be fine with it, and they adapt and make up stuff all the time for that's why I have a job. Yeah, so I just think, you know, it'll be like the same as it's always been, like, more hardcore conservative interpretations will maybe be more troubled by this, but I think Christianity has also always done a version of like very liberal and open and like metaphorical interpretation that definitely can survive without homosapiens. However we may feel about that.   Adam Pryor 50:18 Yeah, I mean, I think that would be the case. I, I do think, though, that you end up with a I'm gonna I'm gonna go with this since you know, Rachel's in the right religion, right. I think there are winners and losers out of these, like traditions as a result, like there are. Look, we can use the evolutionary example, right? There are evolutionary streams of various religious traditions that get closed off if you start taking this seriously.   Ian Binns 50:47 Well, so what I'm really curious about I keep coming back to this AlphaGo thing, like, I mean, if you really think about it, that is really amazing. This happened.   Kendra Holt-Moore 51:01 Right, right. Like, it's how to, like sign up for the go championship or something like,   Ian Binns 51:09 no, no. I've never played the game. So I would probably do pretty badly. But no, my point is, is that so this this article that I have from wired magazines, like 2016. So what's happened since then? Like if this was kind of a pivotal moment, in machine learning, and deep thinking, what I mean, Adam, are you aware of anything like that, since then has happened? That's,   Adam Pryor 51:44 well, like more like, Holy moly, I can't believe that happened. So it's interesting to me that like, after this moment, my understanding is that the deep mind team, like so the folks who did Watson, the folks who did AlphaGo, like, they have shifted on to more substantial issues. Things like climate change analysis, right, very specific, like, like, targeting this type of deep learning to specific problems. So like Zack mentioned, like at the beginning, like cancer, cancer Reading, right, so I'm training algorithms to be better interpreters of MRI scans, and CAT scans, then human technicians, right, that's an active project going on at a couple of medical schools, you start to see these very, they tend to be like highly targeted problems right now. In terms of stuff that I'm thinking about, there are some like creativity ones. I taught a an interdisciplinary class with a math professor on this. And Charles Deuce toi, wrote a book called the creativity code that covers like, some of the like, latest things, and he starts like with AlphaGo, and then works on other places. And the book is framed around, like, will we reach a point where deep learning is more creative about mathematics than mathematicians are? is like a sort of, like, problematizing question. But there's some really interesting examples along the way of, you know, like the action Jackson, right, which is a machine painting system. Some other music is a big area, right? Where there are good AI projects working to do composition work.   53:47 Cool. So.   Adam Pryor 53:50 So on the one hand, there are some like kind of like, pet projects in the creativity realm. There, there are a series of like, I think, specific medical and environmental technologies, where you're seeing this used pretty robustly. There was a good piece in The New York Times Magazine on where AI, particularly deep learning systems will end up replacing a variety of middle class jobs. Actually, there was the final one of the final assignments for the students in the class was when their job that they want to pursue be replaced by AI in their lifetime.   Kendra Holt-Moore 54:29 That's a great assignment.   Adam Pryor 54:32 Most of them said probably, and that, you know, that, you know, ultimately, there's something about their humaneness that would prevent them from losing their jobs specifically.   Rachael Jackson 54:43 We talked a little bit about that, I think in a in a previous episode to where we say like, some of us like, our jobs are secure. My jobs not going anywhere.   Adam Pryor 54:54 But mine definitely will go away. I mean, I'd be shocked, actually. Yeah. Part of it will be part certainly part of it would.   Rachael Jackson 55:02 Yeah. One of the things that I just wanted to sort of end on that we've been dancing around but not really talking about is our human relationship to AI. In terms of what will our relationship be, if we're looking at relational or transactional? Those are sort of the buzzwords these days for how to how to be inside a community like are you treating? Is your community? Is your place of worship transactional? Are you fee for service? Or are you relational, and that's how you get people to stay members. Or to stay engaged, not just a membership, because it goes much more beyond those buzzwords of the last half decade. And for me, it goes further back to Martin boober. And the idea of, not just where is God, but where are we, and how are we using the ideas of AI it or I thou relationships, and for boober boober said that we can have an I it relationship with another human being and most of us do almost all the time. Right? The person that at the grocery store, the person the bank, Teller, any delivery service, even friends, even rather acquaintances, and co workers, most of them are I it relationships, very basic, based in transaction I will do for you only because you do for me. And that's sort of how we just can live our life and the antithesis to that is the I thou relationship, the ICU is you and want to be in relationship with new, not because of what you can do for me. And that is that can be true for every person. And also with things you can have an i thou relationship with a tree. And I love that one like I guess I have, I haven't I have an i thou relationship with my tree. And if we take that concept, how right this is, this is sort of my hopeful, optimistic view of where we can go with this, no matter what it is that we're talking about. If it's a deep learning, if it's an AI, if it's if it's, if it's Rosie, if it's your Roomba, you can have the I thou relationship with it, with the object with the creature with this, this something in front of you, and you're better for it as as is that thing. And wherever, wherever we ended up going with it. That's that's the perspective. And that, for me is what I can contribute to these relationships. What my perspective and how I perceive the thing across from me, I'm smiling.   Adam Pryor 57:55 So so I want to know, do you do you say thank you to Siri or Google or Alexa? When when you ask it questions, almost always,   Rachael Jackson 58:04 and it changes that I have I have Alexa. And it changes the sound of its voice. And it'll give me two or three phrases back such as you betcha. And it's like this really fun. Is this really fun statement of like, Oh, you're welcome. Now, just FYI, if you say I love you, it does not say I love you back. It says, you know, like, thank you, which is really smart emotional learning. So you don't find to get that attachment to this object. So that I believe is the programmer is because it's not yet capable of doing that. But maybe we'll get to a point of how and Eureka, right, the TV show Eureka where he's buried to a house.   Adam Pryor 58:47 So I I will say I tell Google thank you all the time. Whenever whenever I asked Google something. Um, but what it did make me recognize is that I don't say thank you to my cats. As we talked about, I though I had relationships,   Rachael Jackson 59:05 but but you don't like your cats. You have until your cats you kind of hate them.   Adam Pryor 59:08 No. So. So this is the like, but when we ask, like, Can we have a closer relationship with machine learning, deep learning than we do with other creatures? You right? Like I don't even have to go all the way to a tree. I can just go to the cats in my house. Right, right. Like any when they get up on the counter. The thing I shout at them is nobody loves you. Right? So like, I mean, I don't shout nobody loves you Google. I say thank you.   Rachael Jackson 59:33 You have a deeper relationship with your Google than you do with your cat. Yeah, I think that's a perfect example. You monster.   Zack Jackson 59:45 This has been Episode 85 of the down the wormhole podcast. Thank you for coming on this journey with us and especially to all you who have helped us to spread this work by sharing with your friends or leaving us a review wherever you get your podcasts. That's really huge. Thanks also to our patrons on Patreon for helping us to make this podcast happen. If you'd like to donate to the cause you can find [email protected] slash down the wormhole podcast. And make sure you send in your questions for our new q&a segment as well. So hit us up on Facebook, Twitter or through our website at down the wormhole.com

Episode 84 In part 14 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with the Rev Dr Eric Elnes. He believes that we are in a sort of spiritual seismic shift that has not been experienced in 2,000 years, and is hopefully optimistic about the future of religion, spirituality, and humanity as we know it. We talk about weird new ways of doing church, what he learned from walking across the country, and what we can glean about God from the Higgs field. Make sure you don't miss this one!    The Rev Dr Eric Elnes  is a biblical scholar, pastor, author, podcaster, and video producer. He is the founder and host of Darkwood Brew which has created and hosts more progressive Christian video resources than anyone else in the world. He is the newly settled pastor of First Congregational United Church of Christ in Portland Oregon and a leading articulator of Convergence Christianity. Find more at https://www.darkwoodbrew.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.    Zack Jackson 00:04 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week we are exploring how that relationship gets worked out in real life with one of the current Sinai and Synapses, fellows, Sinai and Synapses is a two year fellowship committed to elevating the discourse surrounding religion and science and where the five of us first met. So without further ado,   Eric Elnes 01:17 Dozens and dozens, yes, but something that I think our listeners might be less familiar with, then even knowing that UCC pastor, is that phrase that I brought up convergence, Christianity, which I think is a term that they may not have heard, but a concept they have almost certainly felt or experienced in the world. So I wonder here if at the beginning, because I know, a lot of your work is colored by this concept and all that goes with it. So could you just take a minute here and unpack that a little bit for our listeners, you sure I can't. And what I'll say is kind of the tip of an iceberg. This goes way, way deep down the wormhole. So if I want to go talk about like how this is, I see this acting and other even other faiths, and beyond the little, you know, puddle of Christianity that we didn't have a habit, I'm happy to talk about that. But really, the whole idea of convergence came when I i and a bunch of progressive political progressive Christians, we walked across the country in 2006, to try to wave a flag say that you're helping people realize there are more than one way to be a Christian. And we had this platform called the Phoenix affirmations, which eventually kind of became kind of a theological backbone for a lot of progressive Christian churches. Kind of 12 points of affirmation about why what makes us excited to be for our faith outlook, we weren't bashing anybody. We're just trying to articulate things like, you know, we take the Bible seriously, but we don't read it literally. We don't. And we acknowledge there are other paths besides Christianity that are legitimate, even as we claim our own path, as Christians, you things like this in claiming environment, environmental responsibility, openness and affirmation of LGBT LGBTQ community things that you would or would not surprise you to find about progressive Christians. But we walked across the country thinking we were waving this banner, and we're going to lead the charge, or at least help help help lead the charge to a greater Christian witness in America, but in more generous spirit. And what we discovered was almost immediately our, our understanding of what was going on in our nation were completely wrong. Or at least at least needed to be significantly rethought because we kept running up and up into two kinds of people. One were people on the other side of the theological swimming pool than we are, you know, more of evangelical Christians who were as frustrated with their own camp as we were. And if he asked them, well, what are your hopes and dreams, they were looking for things like LGBTQ equality, they're looking forward, non literal Reading of the Bible, they're looking for not throwing everybody into hell who wasn't Christian. They're looking for the very things that progressive Christians stood for, really. But we also found from our own camp, progressive Christians who are having a huge problem with with our camp as well, but they weren't looking for a more conservative Jesus, for instance, they were just looking for Jesus, were so much progressive Christianity has basically said, and I very much count myself as a progressive Christian, but with so much progressive Christianity said, whatever, we think that the evangelicals have fundamentals of do badly, we won't do it all. So they do Jesus. Jesus, they do Bible badly, well, will, will not do the Bible. You have to do a prayer badly. We're not gonna talk about prayer and all these things, and there and there are people who are frustrated by that. It's like, I don't want to conserve Jesus. I don't want conservative prayer, but I want those things. I want these classic things, you know, and so and but so but we listen to those those what I would call people who are moving to be post evangelical progressives, and people were becoming you know, post liberal. All progressives. And so what they were looking for was actually found in the other side. So like those, those former evangelicals or becoming former evangelicals still had Jesus, and Bible and prayer only they had, they themselves have moved beyond the conservative, you know, layering of that. So they actually had a gift to bear to these post liberal progressives. And the post liberal progressives have gifts to bear before the post evangelical progressive, because they they were doing things like LGBTQ equality, and you know, pluralism and all these things. And we realized that you both camps, they've grown up to be suspicious one another. And both camps have no idea that the other camp exists. And so every year we asked ourselves, you know, have they found each other yet? Because we knew that if they didn't find each other, they would there just be like this heyday. It's like, Oh, my gosh, you got your chocolate in my peanut butter. I got my peanut butter, your chocolate. I was like, Wow, this is amazing. Yeah, it really felt like like, like, there were two groups of escaped slaves out in the wilderness that Moses, you know, was trying to wrangle together. And if they never get together, they would just like drop everything, the gifts they would that they brought out of Egypt that they could not bear to leave behind. They were the gifts that each other needed. And they could build a new tabernacle in the wilderness based on those gifts that come together as convergence. And so every year we asked ourselves did that, have they noticed each other? And every year? We had to say No, honestly, we'd like to say yes, but we know until this little festival happened in what year was that? About 20? About 2013 2012. In in, in North Carolina called the wild goose festival. And those people they just simply raised a flag saying, are you into spirituality, justice and the arts? If you are come, and what who the people who came were the exact people from those posts, you progressive post liberal progressives and post post evangelical progress they were they just came they they just came and they showed up and they discovered one another. And all what a party that was when they discovered one they're like, What? Wait, you come from an evangelical church? You're talking to this way? What you're coming from a liberal Tricia talking this way. Like, why, why, why why? This is so cool.   Zack Jackson 07:19 And even the performers too, and the speakers they seem Jennifer Knapp up there. That   Eric Elnes 07:24 was that was some special. Oh, she's awesome. Yeah, exactly. So in every year, it just, it's just built until finally other organizations started realizing this and, and I helped, you know, Cameron Trimble and Brian McLaren. We you put together something called the convergence network, just to try to make use of you know, to kind of bring that entity together. And eventually other organizations started to see this happening San Francisco Theological Seminary, you start start going on and made the Phoenix affirmations of primary working document for their cutting edge ministry, unit and, and Random House, even even Random House. They they'd actually been Reading stuff that was on the darker blue reps website. So you know, what, our marketing people have been Reading what you've been writing, and they're saying, This is exactly what we're saying to in our stats. And like, really, it was, yeah, yeah. What do you think's going on? Is it Well, I think it's might be called convergence, you know, and guess what they named their press. Convergence press. I hope you got a cut of that. And no, no, I didn't get a kind of a No, no, but but the point is, is is, is really that there is something going on that is statistically valid. But under the Trump era, it just kind of went all underground, and seemed like we took many steps backward. But I actually don't think we have in, in my Reading of US history, you know, as we're kind of talking about before the podcast began, if you really take a serious look at it, developments of the grassroots and religion tend to precede political developments by about 20 or 30 years, you think it's the opposite, because you look back and look at social developments that were held up by religion, but it really wasn't until the average Christian or person of faith kind of saw a new thing that suddenly there's a tidal wave change, and it works out. It's worse way out politically. And that happens with the abolitionist movement with women's suffrage with with a welcoming divorcees into the light in the mainstream life of society with racial justice all these LGBTQ cool quality even thought was gonna be the one exception to that but but even then, you could argue that it wasn't until the average even evangelical really kind of saw Wait a minute. Maybe God isn't condemning all these people to hell that suddenly there was this this massive SharePoint and we're still not there. You know, we're not start where we need to be. But there was a massive SharePoint, and that the reason why the Trump kind of era even happen is because some of these developments have sunk so deep into the fabric of human society now that the Old Dominion is reacting and is fighting For its life, there's so many developments that have happened to bring us together in this in not just religious convergences. I mean, convergence of faith and science convergence. You'll all have different religions even and not not like a super religion. But I mean, religions recognize the value of each other's pass into the diversity of faith pads actually makes us stronger rather than weaker. There's all kinds of convergences going on, right now that are leading to, I think, to some changes, so profound that literally, I mean, I'm willing to put it on on tape I years from now, I think we'll look back and say, what's happening now is significance as Jesus's own, you know, coming 2000 years ago, we're in a deep shift that, you know, philosophical talks about 500 years shifts that I think is just absolutely right on us, the tectonic shifts in society. They happen it's at least in western monotheistic society, which was the subject of her study, it tends to have a tectonic shift every five years, but then there's followed by season of like, extreme argumentation and violence until a new normal sets in, and I think that, you know, the last time this happened was, you know, the Renaissance than leading to the reformation, the big fight over what's real, and what, what Where's authority, you know, and what happened in the last century in, in western civilization, and really could argue throughout the world, but I'm just going to keep it from my area of expertise to makes the Renaissance look like child's play. I mean, literally makes the Renaissance look like child's play. I mean, in 1900, the first patent on record in the US Patent Office in New York City, was for a paperclip. And we ended the century literally cloning sheet. I mean, seriously. And then, of course, you think about your site, all the science, you would just geek out all day long about the scientific revolution took place in that century. But that's it was way beyond just the scientific. I mean, in 1900, there were 200 countries that legally had legalized slavery or forced labor in some kind. By 2017, that number was three, you know, in 1900 40%, of all children died by the time they were five years old. And now 4%. child mortality, in 1900 200 countries had the death penalty. And now there are under 90, in 1900, you know, only women had the right to vote and just one country in the entire world. Yeah, and now the numbers about 200 countries. And that's not even counting, like in 1851, we ordinating, the first woman, you know, and that's just been, you know, had a revolution. Since it was look at the history of, of the world. You know, that's just, you know, it's crazy the amount of progress we've made. You know, I mean, you just go on and on and on about this adult literacy. 1900 was 20% of the planet. Now it's 90% of the planet. Or 1900, those who lived into democracy accounted for 15% of the planet population. Now it's about 60% of the planet. And we just talked about LGBTQ equality, too. I mean, think about the revolutions happen. They're all these amazing competitors as yours. Yeah. Yeah. All these amazing convergences and, and all those those social changes did not happen in a vacuum. They're, they're real people who made them happen. People who gave her gave her a hoot about about the world. You know, just the fact that like Nicholas Kristof. He writes that article every year except for like, last year, he writes in why 2019 was the best year in human history. Why 2018 2017 2016? You know, the stats he brings out are just amazing. Like, in last decade, about 200,000 people per day emerged from extreme poverty. 200,000 people per day, 300,000 people over 3000 per day gained access to electricity. 300,000 per day gained access to clean drinking water, this is year after year, per day. In just 1919 alone, 650,000 people per day gained access to the internet. You know, so you're the the Renaissance looks nothing compared to this kind of revolution we are experiencing. And and so it also tells us like, okay, there's the tectonic shift is bigger, way bigger than the 500 year mark. I think I think we're, I think it's bigger than 1000 year mark, I think we're at about a 2000 year, kind of tectonic plate shift, which is also why we're in so much danger. Because every time the tectonic plate shifts, then the whole nature of authority and what's real just goes out the window and then there's a free, there's a free for all until there's a new consensus, you know, the only problem is is now that we've democratized the instruments of mass destruction and get increasingly artful the ways of killing each other every day. And now we got global climate change. Also, because twin threats, human, the human civilization has never experienced such an existential threat to its existence in all of human history as well. So if somehow we've got to jump the track of human history, we got to do it history doesn't expect in order to survive this kind of thresholds in time. So it's good news and kind of terrifying news. But to me, and I kind of go back and forth from year to year, which I think is, you know, which, which one is going to win out, you know, we're going to actually survive this or we're going to is it you know, are we truly kind of, in this Doomsday, kind of, like, civilizational collapse, I tend to aside with the former more than the latter and these days and, and have for the last few years actually been kind of went out of a deep funk about where this was headed. And think that actually we are building the capability to jump this track, not without pain, not without a certain amount of violence to be sure, probably our it's going to get a little harder before it gets better. But I think the pandemic actually has really provoked a lot of have is terrible and tragic, as has been, you know, I don't know hardly anybody who has not been touched in some significant way or had significant deaths occur or job loss and so forth. Some of the, the flexibility it's almost like been, it's it's low, it's been like a in Oregon, they have with snow as well, on any coast, they have what's known as a king tide, it's the it's when the the tides go way out, you know, and then and then any rocks that were under the water, you know, close to shore, that might be a danger, the boats, you know, are totally exposed. If now, if you knew what you're doing, you knew those rocks were there all the time. But But you can't Time goes out doesn't matter how much experience you have with the waters, you know, you see the rocks, and it seems like the pandemic has lowered the tide too. So we see the rocks that have been there for a long time that we should have dealt with a long time ago that we haven't, you know, racial justice, obviously, you know, is really showed us how how far behind we still are, you know, and and with respect to health, providing health care for all people about a living wage, we call these people frontline workers and we pay them, you're less than a living wage, seriously, you're all these these these rocks underneath the water, they've been really sinking a lot of boats. For so long. Now, we're all of society, if you have your eyes halfway open, you're seeing these things. You know, it's no wonder that Biden's suggesting this massive, you know, all these massive reforms, cost trillions of dollars, it's like, we finally have the political will to actually say, you know what, we better do something about this, while we still have the ability to do something about this. It's like, wow,   Zack Jackson 17:51 I love your spirit. I love the optimism in your voice at this podcast typically, typically goes somewhere in between the world is ending on Tuesday, and rainbows and unicorns are coming on Wednesday, where we're somewhere in between there, depending on who's on the show at the time. So I'm loving this energy, I'm feeding off of it. We're kind of hopefully, coming over a crest in the United States, in COVID. I mean, obviously, we look at the rest of the world. And we are nowhere near through this thing. But we're starting to feel a little bit better here. I know that some of our educational institutions are starting to go back to something that looks like normal, our churches and places of worship, or lots of them are starting to go back to something that looks like normal. You've talked to me a little bit off the podcast about how you're not sure you want to go back to normal, right? That there are some things that happened during this COVID time that that really stuck, that really exposed something that needed to be exposed and whether it's through technology or just rediscovering some of the essentials. What do you see what what has been made manifest that's good about this COVID time that you're gonna keep moving forward in this new church here a part of   Eric Elnes 19:09 sure I'm having another. Can I preface that with a quote by one of my favorite authors Arundhati Roy who wrote the the God of small things. This is just rocked my world and it really feeds into what you're, you're asking about. She wrote something about the pandemic. And she wrote this way. She said, What is this thing that has happened to us? It's a virus. Yes. In and of itself. It holds no moral brief, but it is definitely more than a virus. It has made the mighty Neil and brought the world to a halt like nothing else could. Our minds are still racing back and forth longing for a return to quote normality, trying to stitch our future to our past and refusing to acknowledge the rupture, but the rupture exists. And in the midst of this terrible despair, it offers us a chance to rethink the doomsday. machine we have built for ourselves, it offers us a chance to rethink the doomsday machine we have built for ourselves, nothing could be worse than to return to normality. Historically pandemics have forced human beings humans to break with the past and imagine their world anew. This one is no different. It is a portal, a gateway between one world and the next, we can choose to walk through it dragging the carcasses of our prejudice and hatred, our avarice, our data bank banks and dead ideas are dead rivers and smoky skies behind us. Or we can walk through lightly with little luggage, ready to imagine another world and ready to fight for it.   Zack Jackson 20:47 Man that'll preach.   Eric Elnes 20:49 Oh, wow. I've actually been using that quote like I've quoted it like five times in the last eight weeks.   Zack Jackson 20:58 I say that that author one more time for our listeners.   Eric Elnes 21:01 Oh, Arundhati Roy, she wrote the the God of small things is one of one of many great books she's written. Okay, thank you. Yeah. Indian author. Yeah. And so yeah, I really one of the one of the great awakenings that I personally he's I had in the pandemic was the glory of doing nothing.   Zack Jackson 21:25 Amen.   Eric Elnes 21:28 Nothing productive anyway. You know, I when the pandemic started, I was like the second person all of Omaha, Nebraska, I can't remember the habit. It was a souvenir I brought back from Spain before the Spain was on the hotlist and my carnation had just coincidentally had made this we had taken a little money to, to grow our church, we were on the try faith comments, were at a synagogue and a mosque and white churches all co located. This is my Omaha church, to move beyond interfaith dialogue into interfaith community. It's just super heady thing, you know, and, and we have taken somebody to then get the word out, hey, we're here, we're open come, and then some of the pandemic hits, and oh, how are we going to grow the church if we have no, we can't, can't even open our doors. And so we decided to, to use that money to buy time on television to broadcast our then electronic worship. And, and so for the first time, in my 25 years of ministry at the time, I literally had all my Sunday work was done by Friday at three because I had to have that worship stuff to the television station. So Sunday morning, my only commitment was literally to roll out of bed a little late to having slept in and make some sourdough pancakes for the family, turn on worship and watch it just be available to chat and then have the afternoon free and easy with my family or friends or if not too much friends in the pantry. But you know, and I realized that, you know, I've been a Sabbath follower, very diligent one for all of my adult life. But once I got into ministry, myself became Mondays because you work on Sunday. And so my wife was working my friends role work, my kids are in school. So I took Sabbath alone. But suddenly, I was take a Sabbath, like back in, like, when I was in seminary, where it's like I was with my families, like, this is like, Oh, I forgot about this, this is this is how it's meant to be, you're supposed to just have fun, and it's the play and pray and recreate and procreate if your character you know, just that's what you should be doing on the Sabbath, you know, and, and it really, for the progressive community that which I'm a part of, we get so fixated on healing the hurts of the world, what's wrong with the world, all the things that are broken with the world, that we're just always dog in that all day long? Every day, we're out there striving for social justice, and to make the world a better place. But we've forgotten that there needs to be at least one day where you fall back in love with the world. And you celebrate what's right with the world. And you don't do a freaking thing that to help anything other than just receipt you receive the world that day, rather than try to change the world. And I started realizing, you know, there's a reason why of the 10 most important thing God says the entire Bible known as the 10 commandments, keep the Sabbath holy in there just a few breaths away, but from do not murder. I mean, that's the level of importance that's placed on the Sabbath. And I realized that in my own community, we we are so activist and we get so angry about all of the things that are broken, that we assume there's no joy in us anymore. there and we're all in the know nothing is ever good enough. And we even begin to resent God or even doubt God, could he possibly exist because there's just so much broken. And it's like, if that's really your attitude, you really do need to check that you really do need to stop worrying. They'd go for a long walk in the forest, or sit beside a river for a day, you know, get out on the lake or do something out in nature, just to remind yourself of just how magnificent This world is, as well as broken up and messed up and, and stuff. But you got to connect to him once at least once a week just to you remember what you're fighting for, you know. And so yeah, post pandemic, I realized I want nothing to do with the church that supports everybody just working their tail off seven days a week, or and always being resentful about what's what's broken. I don't want to turn away from that. I mean, six days a week, we should be about that. We should be working at that at social justice and changing that hurts. But maybe my biggest responsibility as a minister is to help teach my own carnation how to do nothing at all. That's my biggest my biggest responsibility on Sunday is to actually help people understand you have a day, not just come to church for an hour, you know, and call your spirituality, you're done for the week. And for heaven's sakes, don't come to church to do more work. You know, but take a take a day, take some deep breaths, you know. And if you could find God in the mountains, you know better than you can find God in church, well, maybe we ought to change church to allow for that, you know, so one of the proposals you're trying to change is post pandemic, one of the proposals is literally for my carnation here in Portland, is that even when it's okay to get back together again, we're going to get back together on the second Sunday of the month. But every other Sunday, God bless if you want to go out in the mountains do that thing or but we'll we'll offer zoom worship, we'll do electronic worship. And and if you want help you be more intentional about finding God and mounts will provide you some helps, you know, there too, but you so go anywhere you want on Sunday, but make sure your butts in the Pew on the second Sunday, because we're really gonna have a good time of it. And we're going to pull out all the stops that we have special programming, special worship, the choir would have been rehearsing all month long for this, this one Sunday, and we're gonna have a potluck afterwards. By the way, that's going to make you the most foodie person to salivate. You know, we're going to invite people to bring their best stuff not pulled from KFC on the way in, pick up a bucket, you know, unless you're a bad cook, then please come through KFC and do that. But But if you have if you can bring a lot of food because we want not just to share it with others. But we have a lot of people who are homeless, we're right down Center City, in Portland, right downtown, we've got tons of homeless people all around. So once they find out there's a free meal they're going to want to come to and we're only going to invite them and say, Hey, come back next month and invite your friends too. So we want to have enough to send the homeless out with food as well and maybe actually start some relationships over you table fellowship with people too. But so that's that so that we actually help our whole congregation experience, Sabbath. I mean, some of our youngest families actually are some of the greatest supporters of this idea in our congregation, they're like, Oh, my God, because for us, it's like a heck of a lot of work to go to church. Like, we got three kids that are all complaining there, although they want different things all you got to get dressed all this and then you got to go. And you know, we start to follow the habit. And once you fall out of the habit, it's really hard to get back into the habit. But it's like you're talking about once a month, we could commit to that, you know, and and our young families are coming to worship more than they ever have, because they can turn on zoom, you know, on Sunday mornings, too. And the average congregation, not just young family, the average parishioner in my Parish, they live 30 to 40 minutes from our downtown church. And so there they've actually been getting to know each other better during the pandemic than they have in years and years. Because they're able to meet on zoom, they're able to after after worship, we have breakout rooms again and breakout rooms they talk about real stuff instead of just like what the weather is and how good the tea is. It fellas they're actually having real conversations with each other every week, and thriving when they get to know each other, you know, so it's interesting, who knows, in the two months from now you have me back on obviously, oh, yeah, that went disastrously rejected that. Whatever. But but but literally, the pandemic has allowed, even that thought to, to be seriously discussed.   Zack Jackson 29:21 So you something you said really stood out to me that taking taking that day to fall back in love with the world so that you're better equipped to then go go out and save it, like progressive superheroes that we all emphasis on the word think we are you there you go. So it It occurs to me that that is more than anything the value that science has given me personally. I'm thinking back to a conversation we had the beginning of the pandemic with Dr. Scott Samson was on the podcast before and he was talking about inspiring the love of the world into children so that those children grow up to care about the world? Yeah. Right. The environmental movement has to begin with loving the world and being, you know, being curious about this. And so for me, that's a lot of my link between my love of science, my love of God, my love of world, my people. It's, it's in that, yeah, Sinai and Synapses is a fellowship, elevating the discourse between science and religion. And so typically, the the fellows have some foot in, in both the one foot more heavily in one than the other. Where's your connection to the world of science? Where do you see yourself plugging in? And?   Eric Elnes 30:48 Yeah, well, I, before I became a had any notion of being a minister, I thought I was gonna be a solar energy research scientist. So I've always had a science has been, you know, very much in my blood. Of course, we've been talking about science this whole time, but really more like social science, you know, the ways your whole movements of people act over, you know, over time, but I can totally geek out on quantum physics, astrophysics, those kinds of things, too. And the climate change thing is, is a really, really a high importance piece of scientific scientific interest for me right now and sociological interest, I think, you know, we are in great danger. Right now, if we don't pay attention to the science on this and, and it's actually part of my enthusiasm for trying to reclaim Sabbath actually feeds very much directly into what I believe the science is telling us about climate change, that one of the best things we can do actually is actively train ourselves to disengage with a materialistic utilitarian, consumeristic society that we did we unplug from the the fantasy that we need to keep consuming every day of the week, in order to to be happy, that we can actually unplug from that system unplugged from the advertising unplugged from all of the, you know, the, our society gives us so many things to do all week long to keep us distracted from what's important. And the pandemic has taught us anything, it's like, once you stop, slow down from your 65 mile an hour lifestyle to a three mile an hour lifestyle, like a walking pace, you notice stuff that you never noticed before. And we need to we need to not just make that a pandemic reality, we need to make that a weekly reality to notice stuff. And, and to get involved in on those x, those six days a week, say, you know what, the Sabbath day, actually is more real than any of these other days, I want to bring that mentality into the rest of the week, as well that we're going to unplug from all this rampant consumerism, we're going to unplug from this overscheduling of our children and ourselves, you know, we're going to unplug from treating people as commodities. And, you know, and and basically stealing money from their pockets so that we can enrich ourselves by not paying people a living wage and things like this. So it to me the Sabbath, actually, and the cell science and climate change all these things in social justice, they all kind of converge in that way. There's, there's more than one kind of convergence going on. But I think what you know, but if you want more than the harder science stuff, you know, for this podcast, I think that, you know, one of the most intriguing concepts that I've heard in recent years is that what had happened when the Higgs boson field was was proven, then that that energy precedes matter, that it absolutely does, you know, to me, that was just a real sea change, you know, and an important watershed moment, at least in my own life, because, you know, if you were to then take the totally non scientific unprovable assumption that that energy is love, that precedes matter. Now, suddenly, you're looking back at those people known as Celtic Christians, that that exists in flower for so many centuries, that until they're finally put down by the Roman Church, their whole notion that, that that this entire plane of existence, we're on it that all of the creative world is literally the incarnation of God's love. It is literally like, do you want to know what God's love looks like? Tastes like feels like smells like go take a walk in the forest. Go get on the lake, go next. You know, get out in nature, and that and you'll see it you'll smell God's love. You'll hear God's love, you'll feel it. This is what it looks like it's in. It's the incarnation of love. And that feeds them back into my scientific the scientific piece like why every Christian should be like, madly in love with science. Because Science in looking at the net, the created world is really dissecting the way love works. You know, the way love operates, and, and challenges some of our notions of love, you know, to, you know, you can use a piece of steel to make a surgical scalpel to heal somebody or to make a knife that will stab somebody, you know, but it's both using something that is theoretically then a create an incarnation of love. Right? So what does that say? It doesn't say that stabbing somebody is loving, it means that that love has an incredible vulnerability to it. That can actually release its own need for control of you. Because for its own reasons, and love has its own its reasons. But that you run into that you start to reconsider your notions of God even that the God is so gentle with us, you know, it's not the God of, of wrath that the guy you get out of line and you know, one millimeter and suddenly like, you know, this fire and brimstone coming at you but a God that is actually gentle enough to do what Jesus says God does, which is You're the son May God makes God's sunshine on the on the righteous and the wicked, you know, in the rain to fall, that actually we are the every person is so utterly blessed by this creation. And there's no morality test given to give you these blessings, as the Talmud says, The Talmud talks about how even a stolen seed bears fruit. Like, literally, you can steal seeds, like something that's totally immoral. And yet those seeds are still going to grow if you plant them in the ground. You know, there's, there's, there's a vulnerability to love. That is just absolutely astonishing. And I think we can all learn, you all learn from we keep thinking we can only give good gifts to people if they deserve it. You know, and if they're at least a little like it by dessert when they're a little bit like us, or at least a little bit like us,   Zack Jackson 37:16 or if they're broken, they're at least broken in the same ways.   Eric Elnes 37:19 Yeah, yeah, exactly. Yeah. But that doesn't seem to be on the agenda of the sacred order of things. And you know, and maybe Jesus was right, and not just naive when he said, you know, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you pray for those who persecute you, all those things that we just think, you know, like we give lip service to, and when we think but when push comes to shove, we say, Well, he's just a naive idealist. Well, now that we've democratized the incidence of mass destruction, is he such a idealist? Or is he a realist? You know, we need to get about that. That vulnerability, that robust rowboat build ability that is willing to gift people who even we, we made, who makes us profoundly uncomfortable, and keep gifting them and keep loving and out love our enemies. Because this whole world is the incarnation of, of love, energy proceeds matter. And we then in a flowing with the material and the spiritual order of things.   Zack Jackson 38:23 So here, as we as we near the end of our time together, you have created dozens of videos, probably hundreds of sermons, maybe 1000s of sermons at this point. Dozens of podcasts for books, I believe. you've walked across the country you've shared at events, you have a lot of important things to say. But I am asking every fellow the same question at the end, which I think is probably harder for someone who has a lot to say to answer. But just if you What is one thing, one thing that you wish that everyone knew about the world,   Eric Elnes 39:23 that the world is an incarnation of a love that loves you personally, personally, beyond your wildest imagination, that everything in this world is oriented toward you, your neighbor, and also other creations and the nonhuman world as well, but it exists in a state that is created out of love. And when you begin to treat it that way, you start to see it that you start to see that more much more clearly. And the more you Pay attention to that reality, the more that reality reveals itself to you, then you don't have to believe in God, I don't think even to benefit from that set that orientation. It's not a it's not a, there's not necessity there just so you pay attention and you start to treat it as if it is, it is a love. That is, I think nature has consciousness. It's our consciousness. But if nature is truly an incarnation of love, then Love is a relational thing. It's not you can't say 12 ounces of love. Right? So all of all creation is inherently relational. We know that if you take humans out, it's inherently relationship, right? So add us back in the equation we're inherently in relationship to and you start to flow without love, you start to flow with creation when you flow with love.   Zack Jackson 40:56 Well, thank you so much for that. Thank you for this past 45 minutes or so of conversation. If our listeners are interested in hearing more about what you have to say, they can check out any of your books, I actually just purchased gifts of the dark wood seven blessings for soulful skeptics and other wanderers. I just the description alone felt like hey, he wrote a book for me, that's great. You can also check out dark wood brew.org dark wood brew.org to check out the videos that they're produced. And there's some more links and information about how to find the podcast, and all kinds of other things that you're doing. there anything else that you would like to let folks know about how they can find you? Or? I think you've done a great job already. More than they need to know about me. No address or cell phone number.   Eric Elnes 41:53 No, but if you're ever in Portland, first Congregational Church of Christ, come come. Well. We are at least get online. You will Yes, physically now.   Zack Jackson 42:02 Maybe the second Sunday. If you're there. There we go. Come to the second Sunday. Bring some KFC and have a good time. All right. Well, thank you so much, Eric. Thank you, sir. It's been a

Episode 83 For the next five weeks, we are going to talk about "medical ethics" broadly, but specifically about the various stages of being alive, from birth to death. In part 1, we're starting at the beginning. How much of who you are is determined at (or before) your birth? Can trauma be passed down genetically? Can generational cycles of unhealth be broken? Is there value in prenatal testing or does it create self fulfilling prophesies? How can we make sure that future generations are not saddled with our burdens?    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    Further Reading https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190326-what-is-epigenetics https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fearful-memories-passed-down/ https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/10/health/mind-epigenetics-genes.html?smid=url-share https://www.spectrumnews.org/features/deep-dive/the-problems-with-prenatal-testing-for-autism/   Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.    Zack Jackson 00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are   Rachael Jackson 00:14 Rachael Jackson, Rabbi at Agoudas, Israel congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina, and a trait that I see in myself that I can trace back is dark hair coloring, which I get from the my father's father, who was Iraqi Jewish.   Kendra Holt-Moore 00:35 Kendra Holt-Moore, PhD candidate at Boston University. And my trait that I've inherited from my family is having only two wisdom teeth.   Ian Binns 00:52 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education that UNC Charlotte and the trait that I get from my dad's side of the family from the Binns side is the shape of my upper lip. We call it the Binns lip.   Zack Jackson 01:07 Zack Jackson UCC pastor in Reading Pennsylvania, and I am 2% Neanderthal on my mom's side, and maybe more on my dad's side, but we haven't tested that. And I like to think that's why I am so comfortable in the cold, and really appreciate a good Mammoth Burger. But we're talking about genetics a little bit today, because we are entering into a brand new mini series, broadly speaking about medical ethics, but divided up into the various life stages of, of being a human. So we're going to start with birth, as we, we often do, as humans, most of us, I think start with being born, moving into puberty, which most of us don't want to remember, then into pregnancy, general issues of age, and then end of life. And so we're gonna start with the start today. And as I was thinking about all of the different, all the different different issues connected with, with birth, with being born with all of these new medical procedures around testing, and Neo Natal surgeries and DNA, and knowing how much Neanderthal you are, I went and I got a haircut. And the guys in the barber shop, just randomly started talking about this stuff. But like, I'll try to frame it for you. So I'm sitting there, and one of my favorite parts about going to get my haircut is that I don't have to talk to anyone. And I get that at barber shops and not quite at salons. So I go there to just sit and have the Zen moment with the clippers and enjoy my ASMR experience. And so the guy, the barber next to me says, Oh, hey, we're having a boy. And every one of the barber shop is super excited. This is his first kid. And wow, I didn't even realize your girl was pregnant. Man. That's awesome. How did you find out so early? And he's like, Oh, well, we did that test, that blood test where you can tell like the gender of the kid and their testing for autism and all that stuff. And then this guy from across the bar across the barbershop is like, Man, that test is BS. They can't tell if your kid's gonna be autistic. And then he's like, Yeah, man, they totally can. And he's like, Well, why would you even want that mess? What are you going to do? And he's like, Well, you know, I want to be prepared. In case I'm my kids gonna be special needs. And he's like, whatever man. He's gonna be what is gonna be? Well, what are you gonna do read some books, you know, read books. He's like, I read books, you don't know me. And he's like, you know what? They said that my boy was gonna be autistic. And he came out just fine. He's like, the smartest kid in his class. And the other guy was like, yeah, most autistic people are super smart. He probably is autistic. And he's like, there's nothing wrong with being autistic. And I'm sitting here like, man, I just wanted to get my haircut.   Rachael Jackson 04:14 I want to know, on barber shop, like,   Zack Jackson 04:15 I know, I want to say something. Because now I've been thinking all about, about genetic testing and neonatal care and epigenetics, and all of this and, and that's when the guy was like, Well, do you have anyone that's autistic in your family? And he's like, Nah, man, I'm not my mom's not Dad's not grandparents now. I mean, my sister is but like, that's just because mom had like, really stressful pregnancy. And so my sister came out autistic because of that, and that at that point, I was like, Man, that now I really feel like I need to say something. But I didn't. Because I hadn't done my research yet. For the episode. Had I done the research for the episode, I'd be like, man, stop blaming your mom for all your problems. You are not Sigmund Freud. It is not entirely the mother's fault for everything that come that is wrong with the child. Also, let's reframe that a little bit that being autistic does not mean that there's something wrong with you that some of the most important humans that have ever lived, were on the autism spectrum.   Rachael Jackson 05:19 Yeah, neuro diversity.   Zack Jackson 05:21 Amen. For neuro diversity, if we were all neurotypical, what a boring world that would be. Yep. So I got to thinking, I got to thinking about what is the purpose of testing for these sorts of issues beforehand? What is the point of knowing your genetic predisposition to things? How, how much of an effect does it actually have? Like what kind of a life the mother lives while she's pregnant? Obviously, we know things like if mom is drinking heavily, or taking drugs, then that's gonna be passed on to the baby. But like, what if mom has a really stressful job? Or isn't sleeping very well? Or, like, how much is that messing up that baby's life? And I mean, I, I remember how stressed out my wife and I were her more than me, because I felt like my stress didn't affect the baby. But she was like mad. She was so scared that the actions that she took during this time we're going to ruin her baby's life, and what pressure to put on a person? And do we actually have any science to back that up whatsoever? So the answer is, yes. Also, no, but mostly No. But also Yes, because the field of epigenetics is still fairly recent. And there's a lot of controversy around it. And I should say what I mean, when I say epi genetics, is that you have DNA inside of you, that is the building block that makes you who you are, it is your blueprint, there is a series of, of chemicals that all went worked together make you the wonderful human being that you are now attached to those are also these little chemical markers that can turn things on and off on it. I remember Reading a while back about some scientists that were trying to recreate a dinosaur out of a chicken. I think we talked about this during the Jurassic Park episode, and that they're trying to reverse engineer it by like finding the parts of the chicken's genome that have to do with feathers, and then putting a little chemical marker on there to turn it off. So that then they don't grow feathers, and maybe they can find one where they can get teeth back again, where like, we can tell a lot about you based on your genome and the things that you have on and off on there. And so certain stressors in life, certain aspects, sunlight, even can affect which parts of the genes are expressed and which parts are not. And so that's what we mean by was the epi, genetics, none of this stuff is going to change your genome. But it is going to change how it is expressed, whether the light switch is on or off in the different parts of you. That I get that fairly accurate. Rachel, the chemist?   Rachael Jackson 08:13 Yeah, I think the only thing that I would also not the only thing, I would also add that these things can be turned on and off, not just in the neonatal state, but throughout a person's life. So for example, one of the things that we're we again, Oreo, we're not actually any of us, we are looking at his addictions, right that how do you know if this is if you're going to be addicted or not addicted? Or if that's, you know, there's, there can be a marker, but if you've, how do you know if you're going to be addicted to cocaine if you've never taken cocaine, like, so perhaps you need to have some cocaine before that marker gets switched on, you don't know one way or the other. So, same thing with other drugs, including drugs that we consider legal, such as alcohol, caffeine, nicotine, etc. Really how your body reacts to those things, you will not necessarily know the epigenetic outcome until you're exposed to it. So I just want to add that piece of not simply a neonatal neonatal field of study.   Zack Jackson 09:29 Sure.   Kendra Holt-Moore 09:30 Can I ask a clarifying question to Rachael and or Zack just that like, before we get too much further into the conversation? Can Can one of you describe more particularly like when we when we talk about chemical markers being turned on and off? Like what does that mean in a little more detail? Like what what's the chemical marker made out of and how does it attach itself to the jeans that we're talking about.   Zack Jackson 10:01 So there are three different and let me just pull this up. So I make sure I say it. Right.   Rachael Jackson 10:08 Yeah. And also, just as an FYI, I have several articles that we'll be putting in the show notes for people that want to read a little bit more about this, in addition to our explaining, Silliman the so let me let me make a different analogy and take it out of take it away from things that most of us are not comfortable with, right? Like, we're not going to talk the four things that make up DNA, right? We're not talking about base pairs, we're not talking about those things, right? Most people are not super comfortable with that language. Let me make an analogy to say your home. Right? My home right now. I'm currently in my bedroom, and I have curtains. And I also have lamps and light switches. Right? How much light do I have in my room right now? That depends if I have turned on my light switch. And that depends if I have opened my curtains. Why would I open my curtains because I want more light? Well, did I know that I was allergic to sunlight, not until I opened my curtains. Right? So something has to happen. So it's already there. It's something then that changes that says now, now this thing has happened. So for some it's a methylated zone. So if we then look at the actual DNA, it's a methylation process, or a D methylation process, it's adding or subtracting these things that are already there and turning them to a different form, which means some which is why the light switch works really well, because it's always there or curtains are always there. It's just whether or not you open, open them or close them. And so again, part of that is metallization is one of the big ones. That's what I would add that's there's a there's a big one there in terms of smoking, smoking cigarettes, is a big switch, a big activator of turning on things that will or will not happen in one's body. When that happens. One of those things is a methylation that happens on in this particular case, it's the A h r gene. But given that smoking is often a choice, I'm not saying it's not an addictive choice, but there is a choice there. Most people don't do it when they're born. And people have the ability to not do it. So you can actually monitor how much of this epigenetic change is happening in a person who, right before they smoked while they're smoking and former smokers and really what it looks like. So that's a really clear example, when you can look at an adult what's happening.   Zack Jackson 12:48 So the DNA metallization is one of three ways that this process can happen. The other way is through modifications that histone modifications, which is the the actual framework of the DNA, like the Think of it like the scaffolding of your DNA. The other way is micro RNA expression, which is something that I have a really cool experiment to talk about and a bit that, as far as we know, these three ways seem to be how how these genes get expressed in different ways. But some combination of three, it's not usually just one or the other. And there could be other mechanisms as well. It's not fully understood exactly how it happens, just that it does. And all of the all of this is also way above my head. So I just want to acknowledge that I'm not a biologist. And a lot of these words, I am also learning for the first time along with you fare listeners. A lot of the early, just almost intuitional epigenetic studies looked at the way that babies develop in the womb, while their mothers experiencing certain types of trauma, right, like famine, or displacement or something like that. And I think we've kind of known intrinsically that that sort of thing affects the child for 1000s of years. But it's always been an issue of mom's fault. So what's really fascinating about some of this study recently is they've done all these genetic studies on sperm because it's a lot Easier to study than eggs. And so there was this one study that was done that was published in 2013. In nature, which was fascinating, and kind of was a made a huge splash and a ton of controversy on both sides, and got picked up by all kinds of news outlets end misrepresented. in so many different ways. It's one of those groundbreaking sort of studies where extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So here's how here's how they laid out the experiment. They took a group of mice. And because scientists hate mice, they, they would expose them to a, a chemical called acetone, which is just a it's a scent, they use it in artificial smells all the time, it smells vaguely of cherry blossoms, they use that scent because they know exactly which odorant receptor in the olfactory bulb it corresponds to. So they don't have to guess where it is they know exactly where it is. And every time they expose them to that smell, they electrocuted their feet. Because they hate mice. And so they did this enough, such that when they would spray the gas, the mouse would get terrified. So they traumatize the poor mouse that they they correlated that smell with being electrocuted. So then they bred that mouse, and had that mouse be raised by a totally different parents. So then there was there was no acculturation whatsoever, and exposed that mouse to that smell, and found that that mouse also kind of freaked out by it.   Rachael Jackson 16:47 Now the second not the second generation mouse,   Zack Jackson 16:50 yeah, but not other smells. And they even they looked in the DNA of the sperm of that mouse that second generation, and found markers on that part of their DNA. And after it had they euthanize The poor thing, they autopsy the brain and found that that odorant receptor, that is corresponds to that particular smell, had more receptor cells, and then other smells. So that mouse was born, more attuned to that smell that its father was traumatized by, despite having not been raised by that mouse, or having any being taught anything about it. But then they bred that mouse and found that the next generation, so the grandson of the first one, still held those markers, and was overly receptive to that smell. So three generations of mice were traumatized by the same traumatic experience. And it was it changed how their bodies developed. Now, it didn't change their DNA. And that's important, it did not change their DNA, it changed how their DNA was expressed. So that that expression caused that part of their olfactory bulb to make more cells, so they'd be more sensitive to that awful smell that hurt their grandfather. And so it's important, and this is what the news people got wrong was that the future generations weren't scared of the smell. It didn't ruin them. It wasn't that the fear was passed down through generations, or the trauma was passed down through generations. But the effects of it, the sensitivity to it was passed down three generations. As as you know, as you would expect, this is evolutionarily helpful, that if some environmental trauma is introduced into into an area, you want your future generations to be able to avoid the thing. And so they're adapting in real time, to this awful thing that is happening to them. And then a couple of years later, and this is the super hopeful part. They and a number of other people redid the experiment. But this time, they exposed a separate group of mice to the smell traumatize them did the whole thing, that awful thing that they because they hate mice, and then they stopped electrocuting them. But they would still give them the smell. But they wouldn't electrocute them. And then of course, the mouse would be scared and they'd be scared and but eventually they stopped being scared of the smell. And then that next generation was did not have those markers. They did not have a larger olfactory bulb, they did not have the predisposition to fearing or being more receptive to that. So in essence, one of those, that generation overcame it by being exposed to it without the Negative, traumatic effect attached to it. And it changed their epigenetic markers changed in their sperm, so that it no longer passed that down to the next generation.   Rachael Jackson 20:12 Like, like, they basically said, Hey, this was trauma, but it's not actually trauma anymore. So let's, let's rewind, let's rewire ourselves again to say, this activity, this sense is safe.   Zack Jackson 20:29 Right? Which again, makes sense from a evolutionary perspective that now things have adapted and the other way. And so now, our genes don't have to protect us from that anymore. And I'm trying so hard not to draw really strong conclusions from this because my goodness gracious will this preach this, this feels intuitively correct, right? I mean, how much of our, in our, in our scriptures in our religious traditions are around generational sin, generational punishment, generational trauma, the sins of the Father that go down seven generations, like how much of overcoming that is baked into our religious stories that we tell, and I want this to be true, but it is very, very much in the infancy and we do not understand the mechanisms by which this would even happen. Because when, when a sperm and an egg, you know, get together and do their do their fun thing. Most of them epigenetic markers are stripped from the DNA of the sperm. And then it all gets reconfigured inside. And so it shouldn't work. So there has to be another mechanism that's at play here that's making it happen. Or it's all just wishful thinking on the part of the researchers. And it's all Bs, and we want it to be true because it feels true. So I need to make that disclaimer right here. Because epigenetics feels like it would solve so many problems, and explain scientifically so much of what we experience. But it also might not, it might just be wish fulfillment,   Rachael Jackson 22:10 right? Stop blaming your grandparents for things that are happening in your life, right? Like we don't, we don't need to do that either. But I, I'm looking at this from a slightly from a similar perspective, but perhaps a bit differently. Not being able to, to wish away things that we see happening. But these, these experiments are so tightly controlled, looking for one tiny thing, to then make the leap that it would go to us. And we could then identify all of our generational trauma, through these things to make that leap feels exceedingly large. First of all, right, like it's one smell, one type of creature. Three, generally, it's, it's so tiny, so narrow in its scope. So that would be my disclaimer. And so when we then move to say, humans, which is, I think, where our narcissism takes us. Why does it matter? What read this question, also of if you go seeking for something, if you ask a question, what are you going to do with the answer? So go back to your barber shop people? Why are they asked like, why did you do the blood test? What do you look at? Oh, to get prepared for what? You don't know You don't? Okay? So barring the incorrect understanding that this can tell you autism or not autism, which is not been proven at all, so let's dispel that. But if that were the case, autism itself expresses itself in Oh, very vastly different ways that a person can't actually be prepared for that. One cannot prepare themselves for some of these traits that we may or may not be looking for. It's very different than straight up genetic traits. Right, straight up, you know, this person has different genes, which causes them to have Tay Sachs, which causes them to have CF. That cough was timed appropriately. Another questions that we're looking at, so why are we asking these questions? What will it actually give us because if you ask the question, You have to do something with the answer.   Ian Binns 25:04 Well, and with that, and maybe reminded me of when we learned that animals pregnant, and throughout the pregnancy, I remember just kind of asking one day, so we're gonna do those genetic tests, because I didn't really know anything about him, right? And you just kind of hear about him and stuff. And I just was curious, like, it didn't really matter me either way. And I remember she kind of said the same thing that you were kind of talking about Rachel, was that, what would we do with that information? Like, is that going to determine if we, you know, would end a pregnancy or not? Again? For our purposes? Probably not. Enough, just like them? Yeah, there's really no point for us to do that. You would. So and that was just that was our decision. That was our choice. Was that was a decision we made? And so yeah, and it was not a long conversation. I don't remember it being something that we really discussed at length to figure out what should we do here or not, it was more just a casual conversation. And that was the choice we made? Well, if   Zack Jackson 26:07 you can identify in your family, a history of dysfunction, and you can say like, yeah, grandfather, great grandfather was a prisoner of war, and came home different. And, and then he had kids, and those kids, and they had a rough go of things, and then kind of our family ever since then, has been battling with with abuse and dysfunction, and addiction and all of these things. And if you understand that, you know, part of that is upbringing, right? hurting people hurt people. But a part of that, if you can identify it could be epigenetically, transmitted from great grandfather's prisoner of war time. And you could identify that yourself, would that be something that you would find empowering, to say, this is something that is within me, but I can overcome it. And I have studies on poor traumatized mice? To show that I don't have this can end with me. And it doesn't have to go to my children? Or does it then just run the risk of, of creating self fulfilling prophecies that well, now I know that my family is just messed up, and it's in my genes, there's nothing I can do to stop it. Or it gives an excuse that now I'm off the hook, because it's, you know, great grandpa's fault.   Rachael Jackson 27:36 In a sort of lightened mood, comment. Who Framed Roger Rabbit in the movie from a very long time ago? Such a great movie, there's a line in there where the female, female, Jessica, she says, you know, in her very sultry voice, you know, I'm not bad. I'm just drawn this way. Is she just saying that it's not in her power? Now, I feel like I've taken up a lot of airspace. So I'd like to hear from a few of the other people here. How this strikes you, right? Yeah, no,   Kendra Holt-Moore 28:26 I just, I just find epigenetics. so confusing. So   Rachael Jackson 28:31 I just don't   Kendra Holt-Moore 28:34 I don't know. The a couple of things I was thinking about, though, is one just like the issue of people choosing to get all the testing done when they're pregnant or not pregnant. I, I've never had kids. So I'm not speaking out of experience here. But just like, I've known people who have had, like difficult circumstances in terms of like health, health problems, like the decisions to make a testing a priority when you're pregnant don't have to just be entirely about, like what your future child is going to deal with or not deal with. But I think there is also like a legitimate concern about wanting to know what your chocolate the state of your child will be, say it that way. Because that can mean a lot of different things. Because you might not be able to prepare for you know, what, what they will experience but if there are other people that you're already taking care of, or if you're like trying to take care of yourself, or a partner. I do think there's something valuable. And I'm not trying to diminish like obviously, there's a lot of really tricky ethical considerations that are like inherent to this discussion. But I think that it's just about like wanting to feel control. And it doesn't really matter. Like, I don't I don't know that you have to do something with the answer if you ask the question. And maybe, maybe not doing something with the answer is like a form of doing something with the answer. Or, you know, like, maybe it's just that the psychological comfort or illusion that you get that you have control? Is what you're doing with the answer to those questions about testing. And, honestly, I don't know whether or not that's something that I would want personally, because there is a part of me that thinks I would be like, forget it, like, let's just jump right in and see what happens. But there's also a significant part of me that would want to know, everything I possibly could not because it would make, make me do anything differently. But I love having the illusion of control over life. And my life. And so, you know, if I can get that, from from these tests, and that, that feels really appealing. And I imagine that there are a lot of people for whom that, yeah, that feels really comforting. And it's not, that's not to say that, you know, the comfort we receive from this kind of, like, genetic testing is worth the other risks that come with it ethically. And, you know, like, there's, I have, I have this fear that we're heading into a, you know, will basically just be living out a dystopian novel plot in like, 30 years. But like, I get it, I get the appeal of wanting to have   31:57 so hopeful   Kendra Holt-Moore 31:59 wanting to have that control and just know, like, knowledge, it's so appealing. And it doesn't matter. I think for a lot of people it doesn't, I don't know, that people are really thinking through what their behavioral changes would be. It's just like, if you can peek behind the curtain and see what's behind it. It's just like curiosity a lot of times. And so I, I tend to think that that is actually a pretty significant driver, and like motivator to do this kind of thing. And and that that's, even though that's true, that doesn't mean that we should stop asking these other like, really significant ethical questions about, you know, at what cost Does, does this knowledge will, like, how will this change us in the future? But yeah, I don't know, I just, that's kind of what I'm been thinking about?   Ian Binns 32:58 Well, it's still no guarantee. Right? So say, like, these tests could show something, or, you know, whatever level they can show or something like that, but still was not like, as far as I understand that. It's, oh, you get this test? And it's a definitive answer. Either way, what what would happen?   Zack Jackson 33:16 They can tell within I think, 99% certainty whether or not your child has Down syndrome.   Rachael Jackson 33:22 So I think there's the the big difference, and this is where I'll just jump in the difference between epigenetics and genetics. Yeah, genetics, they can tell pretty easily right, and they're high, highly accurate, just like the genetics have an anatomical gender, right there. That's pretty clear what that is. And it being very specific that it's anatomical, right? No, no genetic testing, not ultrasound testing. Right. ultrasounds, then it's like, most of the time, it's more of the, you know, when you're looking at an ultrasound, is there a penis is there not a penis? And so there can be something wrong with that ultrasound, but if you do the blood testing, there's no question again, from the sex perspective, right, is this x y or z or x x right from that perspective, not talking the gender that we feel those are those are highly accurate. epigenetics, not right. epigenetics is like, for example, if we take this idea that and we go back to our grandparents, you know, your grandmother, right, you a grandmother was alcoholic, and your father is alcoholic, are you going to be alcoholic? And then there was nothing else going on? Right? There was no abuse. There was nothing else is just this person was an alcoholic? Can you determine if you yourself will then be addicted and changed by alcohol? Are you one of the people that can just take a drink? and totally be fine with that level of that question? And for the most part, that's where it's not clear? And what are you going to do with that information? So and that that's for me, one of the places where we could be positive about it, I'm saying, Okay, if I see some epigenetic markers, as well as the nurture part of this alcohol I have seen happen, do I, then this third generation choose to have alcohol in my life? Or do I choose not to? And do I then, if I choose to? Am I a little bit more heightened, that something could be amiss, or that's something that my reaction may not be the reaction that keeps me in control, right, Kendra was talking about liking this ability to control, right that we want to have that. And alcohol is one of those things that doesn't allow you to be in control usually. So if you then see yourself going down that path, are you capable of saying, Ah, this, this is not the reaction that I'm looking for. And I see this history, I can stop this. So where I'm coming from is a if we have this knowledge, using it wisely. And not presuming that it's black and white? Yeah,   Kendra Holt-Moore 36:27 I do think I might have a confused our terminology when I because I said genetic epigenetics is so confusing. And then I just started talking about genetic testing. So sorry, I didn't   Zack Jackson 36:40 know it's a very confusing. So I knew a guy. He, his mother drank heavily when she was pregnant. And he was born with fetal alcohol syndrome. And so he's lived his whole life in a group home, and not able to function on his own. And I gave him a part time job at the thrift store I used to run and he, I loved the guy, he's sincere as can be, and was just, he had a heart of gold. And he felt like he was paying for his mother's sins. And that his life was a sort of punishment for her sins. And there was this mix up of just the consequences of a person's actions or traumas or addictions, and then a moral component to it. Of the why. Right, like, why did this happen? Well, obviously, now I'm paying for the sins of someone before me. And that's, I mean, that shows up in almost every religion in the world. And we all do it, that we think we're paying for something, as if there's some cosmic weight that needs to be counterbalanced. And there's a story in which some people bring a man to Jesus who was blind from the time he was born. So if he is blind as a result of being punished for something, and he was blind at birth, it couldn't have been his sin. Right? The couldn't have been retroactively cursed. So therefore, it must have been the sins of his parents, right? So who sinned that this man was born blind, and Jesus looked at them, and he was like, I mean, neither. This man was born blind, so that you could shut the hell up, essentially. And then he healed the guy and was like, stop thinking in these terms. Sometimes things just happen. And it's not somebodies moral fault, nobody's being punished because they're suffering in the world. But suffering in the world exists. And I'm going to try to eliminate as much of it as possible. And how about you do that too, instead of wasting your time trying to find blame for things?   Rachael Jackson 39:02 I really I appreciate that Reading it I hadn't I hadn't heard that story. I'm not super versed in stories of the Bible.   Zack Jackson 39:12 I mean, that's my translation. Jesus doesn't say Shut the hell up. Clearly.   Rachael Jackson 39:18 Um, you know, when looking through the the Jewish lens when we get to those passages, right, because they certainly appear in Leviticus and Deuteronomy sounds like yeah, for generations. It is what it says. But there's also the, the the flip side of it, that the righteous shall have 1000 generations. But read that that, if you're really good 1000 generations will also be really good. And so, so there's a couple of reads there. The first is there's an end rate 1000 is just 1000 generations is an absurd number written, none of us can really conceptualize of that that value. Okay, so it really just means forever if you're righteous, your kin shall be righteous. And if you're sinful, it'll end. Right for generations, you're dead. Right, for the most part, we don't know, for generations as adults. So by that point, once you're dead, then the then the following generation will have the ability to choose themselves. So it's not a perpetual. It's not a perpetual state. It's not a it's not for all time. So that's, that's one read. Again, still don't love this read, because it still does blame previous generations. Then there's another section in the Talmud, which talks about these passages, which basically says, Ah, yes, for generations, only if the sun because remember, the Talmud is completely the misogynistic and only talks about men. Unless, you know, women has have a fault. And then they'll talk about it says, Ah, it's only four generations, if the son of the first person continues in his father's footsteps, which basically says, actually, it's only four generations, if you yourself participate. If you don't break the cycle, then it will continue for a little bit longer. So if you and you can break the cycle, you can, if we look at the the big 10 commandments, number five is Honor your father and your mother. If your father or your mother is doing something that breaks all of the other commandments, then you must break that when you say I cannot do this, if your father says glassbeam, then you shouldn't, if your father says kill, you shouldn't. But if you follow them, because you think you're honoring them, you're actually dishonouring the rest of your community, and don't do that you have the power to stop it. Just because your parents did it doesn't mean you have the same fate. And that's where this this beautiful power of autonomy, power of the self comes in that i think i think i think we absolutely have to give ourselves that ability. That and it has nothing to do with the Odyssey, which is what I which is what I hear you saying, Zack, is that Judaism? Doesn't. Judaism doesn't look at this from a theater. theodicy lens. Why evil things happen in the world? Right.   Zack Jackson 42:36 And it's also, I mean, I'd be remiss if we didn't say that a lot of these sins of the Father get passed down generations are highly situational. You know, there's a study that they, this is, of course, very retroactive, but looked at the birth and death records of Civil War soldiers. and looked at the Civil War soldiers who were prisoners of war, versus those who were not in came home, and then also had kids after the war. So this prisoners of war during the Civil War were horribly mistreated. So they came home emaciated, and on death's door, and found that the next generation born after them, died earlier and had more cardiac issues than those who were just soldiers who saw war, but we're not prisoners of war. So on average, those soldiers who experience more trauma, the next generation died earlier. And now you can read backwards into that. And you can say that that's because they that those trauma, the trauma marked those men sperm, and it made them more sensitive, they made their children more sensitive to anxiety, for example, they're hyper alert. And so their heart was always racing, they died of heart attacks at young age, you can also look back at that, and you can look at it from a sociological perspective, and that if men came back from the war and macerated and broken, they probably were not able to work as hard or contribute as much to their family. So they probably were ended up being more poor, there were no big social safety nets back then. And so those children are probably malnourished because their dad was unable to work as much. And then that then perpetuated a system in in that that maybe was partially genetic, but it was also very social. And we need to make sure that we are not just making our genetics another scapegoat, the way that we did with God punishing people before, because then that lets us off the hook for not changing the world as it is. Because this is one of the huge focuses of the early church like the pre Roman early church, before we got in bed with empire for the first couple, 100 years was all On caring for the widows and orphans, which were essentially the people who had no social safety net, who were not being taken care of, and so who were going to perpetuate systems of oppression by their existence. And there's a wonderful story did I did I talked about St. Lawrence at all. He's one of my favorite dead Christians. He was the deacon of Rome. And that means he was in charge of all the charity and the money. And the local ruler was like, hey, so there's this edict coming out that we're gonna have to round up all the Christians and kill them. However, I know that you are in charge of the purse. So if you just give me the treasures of the church, I will give you a 10 day headstart you can get out of here and you can be safe, you just need to give me the treasures of the church, which I'm going to have anyway. So but this way you and your family can get out of town. So he goes and he liquidates all of the assets of the church. And he gives away all of the gold to the widows and orphans, the poor of the city, that are parts of the church. And then when the time comes, he brings all of them with him. All of the, the the crippled the poor everyone to that ruler and says, Behold, the treasures of the church, our God is far richer than your Caesar will ever be. And the guy was like, man, I do not take this kind of sass from stupid little Christians. And so he had him strapped to a grid iron and put over a fire, because he's Roman, and they're awful. And after a couple of minutes said to him, Have you had enough at Do you recant, and Lawrence said, I'm done on this side, turn me over. So instead of becoming like this patron saint of smart acids or something, he becomes the patron saint of chefs. And so I have a lovely St. Lawrence icon in my kitchen. And he's holding a grid iron with like some onions and garlic hanging off of it. And he's real happy. And he's like, Hey, I'm the patron saint of chefs, when the story is that he was grilled on one. And   47:18 this is   Zack Jackson 47:20 this is why I wanted to dead Christian story hour because man, the stories of these crazy dead Christians, but like, that's the spirit of the early church is the the disenfranchised, those that are being left behind who generationally are being cursed by society, those are the ones that we're here to serve, to bring them out of the generational cycles. And so we need to just make sure no matter where we are on this genetic roller coaster of understanding that we keep that in focus, and we don't blame our DNA, and we still make the changes that need to be made. Yeah,   48:18 I think that   Kendra Holt-Moore 48:20 you've like touched on what makes me just pause in conversations about epigenetics is that, like, regardless of how I just don't even know how to like, describe what it is that I'm thinking, I'm thinking of like the theological explanations of epigenetics. However, those theological interpretations, either shame people for what they are experiencing, or even, like, uplift and empower people for, you know, what they experience. Either way, I just get this sort of like, like cringy shrinking feeling, because I don't like the theological explanations of epigenetic phenomenon, whatever that even means. I'm still like, not entirely sure. It just, I guess I just, I just worry that it's like such an easy it's such an easy conversation to turn towards blame or like deterministic. You know, like,   49:33 well, like,   Kendra Holt-Moore 49:35 what what you both Zach and Rachel, I think said especially earlier early in our episode, like blaming your mom or blaming your grandparents for everything, and, and you know, if you want to put the theological spin on it, I don't know it just it just feels so like. It makes me very uncomfortable. Like, you were cursed. And so God did this to you. I really Like, oh, it feels really similar to the conversations that happened sometimes were like natural disasters happen to that community because they're sinful. That's what I keep thinking about is like, that. Just, it just makes me angry. And so I, it doesn't really matter how generous or not generous, we're being with, like, the theological interpretations of epigenetic phenomenon, I just, I don't know, my head is just kind of like swirling with it, that that's what I've been thinking about. And I think that what you just said, that helped me sort of put together why I'm like, I don't know what to say about   Rachael Jackson 50:42 it's that feeling that you just, you know, you got creepy crawlies and just want to take a shower. Like, it's just, it's just icky. For me, when we add all of those layers in, it takes away individual control, it takes away our ability to look at the world and say, I have a role in this, and I have a I have a role to make it better, myself included in that world.   Kendra Holt-Moore 51:08 And to me, it gives us the ability to ignore other like social conditions that people have no control over, like, you know, the wealth that you inherit, or don't inherit. And you know, it like that, I think is also like a significant part of it is like, is it? Is it epi genetics? Or is it just like bad luck?   Rachael Jackson 51:30 I don't know,   Kendra Holt-Moore 51:32 are those the same thing? I don't know.   Zack Jackson 51:35 But it can also give you an an a heightened sense of empathy. If you understand that this person is acting beyond their control because of forces that were before their birth. And so it might help you to have a little bit more grace with people acting badly. And then get past that to then find ways of ending that cycle. Because even even in electrified mice, we know that we can break the cycle. And we know that through our religious traditions and are our social traditions we know that we can break the cycle with we've seen it done historically, we know how it can be done. We just have to have the willpower to do it.

Episode 82 In part 13 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with the Rabbi Dr. Jonathan Crane. We talk about the various ways that religious and generational groups handle trauma, how we can reclaim the sacred act of eating, and whether we can make the world a better place by paying closer attention to the labels at the grocery store.    Dr Crane is the Raymond F. Schinazi Scholar in Bioethics and Jewish Thought in the Center for Ethics at Emory University, is Professor of Medicine and of Religion, and is the founding director of the Food Studies and Ethics program at Emory University. In addition to being an ordained Rabbi, He is the founder and co-editor of the Journal of Jewish Ethics, and author of several books including Eating Ethically: Religion and Science for a Better Diet (2018), Narratives and Jewish Bioethics (2013) and Ahimsa: The way to Peace.   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.    Zack Jackson  00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week we are exploring how that relationship gets worked out in real life with one of the current Sinai and Synapses, fellows, Sinai and Synapses is a two year fellowship committed to elevating the discourse surrounding religion and science and where the five of us first met. So, without further ado, our guest today is the Raman Ashkenazi scholar in bioethics and Jewish thought in the Center for Ethics at Emory University is the professor of medicine and of religion and as the founding director of the food studies and ethics program at Emory University. In addition to being an ordained rabbi, he is the founder and co editor of the Journal of Jewish ethics and author of several books. I want to welcome to the podcast, Jonathan crane,   Jonathan Crane  00:58 thank you so much for having me, Zack, it's a pleasure to be here.   Zack Jackson  01:01 Yeah, it is wonderful to finally get a chance to connect with you, you have a lot going on. It seems in your biography, a lot of books being published a lot of work being done in ethics, in religion in medicine, you are an ordained rabbi, as well as a full professor. just figuring out where to start in, in getting to know you a little bit better. Maybe you could tell us a little bit about what's occupying your headspace these days?   Jonathan Crane  01:36 Well, thank you for the opportunity. I'm very much interested in understanding how and why people are responding to current events as they do. And there are so many that are provoking us in a variety of different ways. Everything from the pandemic, to racial tensions to ongoing conflicts to wars that are starting up and wars that are ending to climate change, to how we are unfortunately getting increasingly sick from the food that our civilization feeds to us. And there's a whole host to the list goes on and on. And so I'm very curious about how we, as individuals, as communities, as societies, countries, civilizations respond to these challenges and what sort of resources we bring to bear on our deliberations through figuring out what to do with these circumstances, which ones we prioritize is more urgent, which ones we kick the can down the road and say that technology will solve it sometime in the future. And which ones we actually tell ourselves that this is the time and this is the place, and we are the people to actually deal with the mess.   Zack Jackson  02:49 So in your in your professional opinion, how how are we handling, the current mess that we   Jonathan Crane  02:54 understand depends, of course, on whom you are talking about, and which which topics, I think some we are handling better, and certainly depending on the scale. So some institutions, schools or communities or cities or states, and even a few countries are dealing with their tensions and conflicts in very creative ways, and are showing market success toward reaching certain kinds of goals. So for example, New Zealand has done an extraordinary job of protecting its population from the ravages of COVID-19. But it's done so at an expense of closing down international tourism. And so that's a bit that itself demonstrates an ethical deliberation, they saw two things that are good. One is tourist tourism, and the other good is their own public's health. And so they decided that in this instance, one should take priority when they are in tension with each other. Whereas other countries have decided to, to go different routes, and prioritize other things instead of the public's health. And we can see how that plays out. So it really depends on what topic you want to focus in on and at what scale and what timeframe, before you can really begin to give the assessment on whether they are succeeding or not.   Zack Jackson  04:21 It seems there are a few countries in the world that handled the COVID outbreak worse than the United States. And that might just be biased because I'm in it. But it seems like the idea of there being something that we would have to collectively get behind and give up some of our individual liberties in order to better serve the whole is just so antithetical to this American cowboy spirit that we were sunk before the ship left the dock did you do you see any of have that in the why we were so poorly prepared and handled it so bad,   Jonathan Crane  05:06 different countries and America is no exception here, champion different notions of success and what their national story is. So we do have this myth here in the united states of India, rugged individualism. And one of the challenges and perhaps you can reflect on this, too is this pursuit of self interest has amazing power. And it has developed an incredible goods for America and Americans and the world writ large. But at the other hand, it also makes us extremely vulnerable, especially when there are challenges like a pandemic or a challenge, like climate change that impact everyone, and no one can find safety, because everybody is implicated and impacted by these challenges. So rugged individualism is now facing a challenge from from without, from outside of it. And one of the things that I have been impressed with there are those communities here within the United States, sub national communities. So certain cities or religious communities that have demonstrated that the pursuit of self interest is perhaps not as good as the pursuit of enlightened self interest. And when I say enlightened self interest, that means taking other people's interests into consideration as well, like the public's interest, and so they adjust and make changes in their practices and in their policies so as to protect the community, as well as trying to champion individual pursuits as well.   Zack Jackson  07:11 Yeah, I've seen I've seen pockets of that, as well. Do you think there's a generational gap here that younger generations are more community focused and older generations less? So?   Jonathan Crane  07:27 No, on the contrary, I think it's flipped. Now. I think that, at least here in the Atlanta area, I have seen the elderly population be much more vigilant and taking care of themselves and doing what is necessary not only to take care of themselves, but to protect the public writ large, and not engage in risky business, risky behaviors, I should say. Whereas younger generations, some of them understand the seriousness of this public health issue, and also follow vigilant protocols. And then there are, I would say, a fairly sizable minority of younger populations that still engage in Cavalier behavior.   Zack Jackson  08:14 It's interesting that she would say it that way. Because it's been, it's been noted many times by by folks that the younger generations are more globally minded, having grown up in a digitally in a digital world connected by the internet all the time, they they think of themselves more as citizens of the world, as opposed to citizens of a particular ethnic or local municipality. But when it comes to this particular crisis, that they are acting more, more reckless and less in terms of the collective good. That's interesting. It seems like there's a lot of different factors at play in any particular crisis, or   Jonathan Crane  09:04 or I think you're right about that i and and now that I'm thinking about, I think that you're stumbling onto something really interesting here is that perhaps the younger generations are more globally minded in regards to social and political issues. But when it comes to public health issues, to physical issues, about our bodily existence, I don't know whether that global mindedness translates that there's something about the the pre digital person who's not a digital native, who has a greater sense of embodiment, and understands just how vulnerable radically vulnerable we are to each other and to the broader environment that perhaps digital natives are less inherently attuned to.   Zack Jackson  09:57 Now that is something interesting to think about. as a as a person who is like a first generation digital, not really a digital native, a digital, what would you call someone who grew up analog and then turn digital in early teens? digital? Don't know, I can see both sides of that. I want to I want to shift and ask you a question about something that you brought up a little bit earlier, talking about public health crises, and how we deal with them. And you mentioned our modern world, our modern way of producing food and of eating, and how that is poisoning our bodies. And I know there's been a lot said on this topic, both scientifically and pseudo scientifically. And I'm wondering if you can talk a little bit to the scope of the work that you've done, I know you've, you've written an entire book on ethical eating.   Jonathan Crane  11:02 So that book, eat eating ethically, religion and science for a better diet, explores an old idea that the Abrahamic traditions, championed many, many decades ago, hundreds and 1000s of years ago. In a previous millennium, that built on an ancient Greek and Roman idea a classical idea of satiety that one should eat until one is sated, until and, and not until one has been collected. And this notion of eating until one is stated, these religious traditions in insist is a kind of eating strategy, a consumption strategy, where you listen to your body, and your body tells you when you have eaten enough, and it does not mean that you have eaten enough. It does not mean that in this one particular meal, you have eaten enough calories or eaten enough protein or eaten enough micronutrients. But on the whole if one eats this way, eating until you have become sated, and you do this chronically, it is far healthier for your body than if you eat until you have filled your belly or glutted yourself. This is not to say that you should not eat an occasional festive meal. Indeed, every religious tradition mandates festive meals, like for example, Easter, feast or eat at the end of Ramadan, or Passover meal. These feasts are designed specifically to be special, but they can only be special in the context of calendar year where you are not eating a festive meal every single day. If you did that, that would be maladaptive biologically, and also transgressive according to the religious traditions, and contemporary science of nutrition has is corroborating this ancient idea that what is healthy, and also what these traditions say is what is holy, is actually biologically adaptive. Our bodies are designed to eat until we are sated. And all only on occasion, eat beyond that point. So the book tries to explore these ideas of the distinction between maladaptive and adaptive eating between healthy, healthy and unhealthy eating unhealthy and holy eating, and bring it together into conversation with contemporary science. I and my teaching continues to explore some of these ideas. Here at Emory, I teach a variety of courses that a suite of courses the fold into the food studies and ethics program that we're trying to develop here. Because eating is a dynamic relationship. And any relationship is fraught with ethical decisions all the time eating is perhaps one of the most pursued relationships that we all are engaged relationships that we have in our lives. And we need to take time in our lives make time and, and give ourselves the privilege, the opportunity to pay attention to where our food comes from. Who is growing it How does it get from farm to factory to to the local restaurant and to your fork and what are you doing with your fork? We need to be paying attention to all of these questions. So I think that industry and government and cells have done extraordinary jobs in making the food system info hate, obscure, really difficult to have access to. The meat industry is notorious for hiding behind high walls, both physical and legal. I so much so that it is now a criminal in activity to engage in investigative journalism into certain in certain states when you want to go investigate what's going on, on animal factory farming entities. So this does not breed transparency, and it certainly does not inculcate trust. And so it, this is killing us. It's making it difficult for us to trust the food system, it's making it difficult for us to trust not only what the food is and how it gets to us, but also what it's doing to us bodily. We can see it in our ballooning waistlines and our deteriorating health. And   Zack Jackson  16:12 a lot of that sounds familiar, I think a lot of us have heard this, this call to more humane ways of treating animals and livestock have more attentive ways to think about the things that we put in our bodies. But you mentioned a phrase that I don't know if I've heard before holy eating. I'm wondering if you could tell us a little bit more about how the how eating can be a holy   Jonathan Crane  16:45 practice. So every religious tradition that I have come across spends a lot of time and energy and spills a lot of ink, across time and space, thinking about what it means to be an eater of the world. And the world that food has to be if it's going to be food, that has to be not your own body that you're eating. So it can't be your fingernails, it can't be your finger, it can't be your arm, he got to eat something, that's not you. And so that means that it's a relationship with something outside of yourself. And so these religious traditions, he's turned on Western, native and global, spend a lot of time thinking about what that relationship should look like. And they describe and prescribe what they consider to be appropriate ways of managing those consumptive relationships, eating. And so what eating looks like, say, for Judaism, that's the tradition I'm most familiar with, looks a peculiar way. In its details, then say how a Christian my understand to be appropriate and holy eating. But that's not to say that Christianity, and Judaism are mutually allergic about the importance of eating, they just have different details about how to think these things through. So when I say holy eating on every, again, as I hope that religious traditions take eating very seriously. And our civilizations, our companies, try to do a lot of effort to make us forget those commitments that our traditions encourages us to think about, or they try to capitalize on them. And I think one of our challenges as creatures of the 21st century is to reclaim those tried and true, religiously based notions of eating. They were developed over a lot of time, and a lot of space for those good reasons. And we should know that for the vast majority of these religious traditions, views on eating, were developed in context of scarcity and agricultural vulnerability, they did not have big monocropping Technologies. They did not have drip irrigation, they did not have aquaponics. They were exposed to the natural to the vagaries of the natural world. And they did not have supermarkets, and they certainly did not have to our delivery systems to to get what they wanted to their front doors. We live in a context for the most part of extraordinary super abundance. And eating, just because we can is not necessarily eating everything that we can just because we can, is maladaptive biologically and contrary to what our religious traditions teach us.   Zack Jackson  20:17 So if there's someone out there who would like to start thinking deep deeper about where their food comes from, who wants to change their purchasing habits, such that it causes the least amount of suffering in the world. And so they go to the to the grocery store, and they choose to spend an extra dollar 50 on eggs that say cage free or free range, or they decide to buy some bread that says no GMO, or organic, or any number of these pictures and badges and signs and phrases that grace our foods these days. Do any of them mean anything? Can we trust those labels to help us to make better choices,   Jonathan Crane  21:13 we can trust them that they're trying to sell us something, not just the companies to market and attract and seduce and entice? Absolutely, there is only one term that has legal definition and teeth to it. And that is the term organic in order for a product. To claim that it is organic, it must meet certain legal standards of where its ingredients come from, and how those ingredients are produced and manufactured. Everything else any other marketing claim that is found on a package is just that it is a marketing claim. There is no standards outside of that term. So anything that says that it's healthy, that it says that it's all natural, that it has no GMOs, that may or may not be true, but it doesn't mean anything. Anything that has corn in it is necessarily a GMO product, because contemporary corn is unless it's some rare heritage breed, it is a genetically modified organism. So one would have to search far and wide to find to find products that are truly not impacted by save genetically modified or efforts technologies. So you ask what can a person do, a person can look at their purchasing practices, and figure out what their values are, and what their highest priorities are, and figure out how their purchasing practices align with reflect and reinforce those values that I tell my students, they should try when they go to the local grocery store is to just walk around the outside of the grocery store, the outermost layer, do not go through the middle aisles of a grocery store because those are usually where you find find barcode products. And those things that are bar coded are typically manufactured and manufactured products are those that are, for the most part. unhealthy. The fresh produce is on the outside, the fresh dairy, the fresh meats, those are typically offered on the outsides of grocery stores.   Zack Jackson  23:48 I remember some time ago, there being some legal battle with McDonald's because they advertise their chicken nuggets as made with white meat or something made with 100% white meat. And the it was actually made with with some slurry of chicken parts. But white meat was included in that. And so technically by saying made with 100% white meat, they could say like no, we used 100% white meat in it. And so we didn't lie technically, it's just also bones and cartilage and things that are all chopped up.   Jonathan Crane  24:28 Like dog food. Exactly. So companies will go to great lengths, especially those companies that use animal products will go to great lengths to to misinform the public. And they do this for a variety of different reasons. We don't need to get into all of those details. It's complicated, but we should know that. They are there are very creative industries that that make that try to swage consumer concerns And make them feel comfortable in buying their products.   Zack Jackson  25:04 that occurs to me as well that a lot of a lot of the places that have options of fresh ingredients and fresh produce and fresh, locally sourced whatnot, are places of privilege of money, that there's a lot of places, especially in the cities that we call food deserts, where there's not a supermarket within, within the ability to get to without taking several buses. And you're kind of forced to get your food from the local bodega. And a lot of that is questionable at best. And the food that is more affordable because of government subsidies to things like corn and wheat are things that are almost completely just corn that is flavored in different ways to look like real food, but it's not actually real food. So the it strikes me that that a lot of the the fight to help America to figure out how to get its food priorities back in line is also an issue of, of justice for our underserved populations.   Jonathan Crane  26:17 Yes, you're right, there's a lot of racism that's embedded in contemporary zoning. Not just contemporary, but historical zoning practices about where grocery stores can and should be located. There were banking practices that allowed for certain kinds of businesses to be established in certain kinds of neighborhoods and not established and other kinds of neighborhoods. There's a lot of sexism that's involved in this and education ism, as well about who can and should have rightful access to healthier foods. There's classism that's embedded in all of these practices as well, we should recognize that the history of the laws governing our contemporary food environment, were designed precisely to continue to, to fatten the profits of the well off to for the corporations. And there were there were very few incentives to actually democratize, access, democratize the production of food. And that story is quite pronounced here in the south. Black farmers were notoriously kept off out of gaining access to capital investments to improve their farms. And so they had to eventually sell them. And then they become ground, landless. And they had to find their economic wherewithal in urban areas. And so there are, there are a fraction, just a tiny percentage of all American farmers are black, or brown. Even though many of the laborers are black and brown on farms. The people who actually own the farms, or manage them are not minority populations. There's a historical set of complicated interlocking stories about why this is the case. So you're pointing to exactly why we need to have not just a dispassionate investigation into these issues, but a real consideration of the ethics that have been involved in many of those decisions. And what should the ethical values be at play as we move forward?   Zack Jackson  28:42 And thinking globally, as well. There's there's a lot of pushback in the United States right now about genetically modified plants. And I think part of that is Monsanto is not helping by being in kind of a dastardly organization. But there, there's push on either side, when places that are being ravaged by climate change, or dealing with long periods of drought, who can't sustain their populations, they're being production of like, vegetables that can that are more drought resistant, through genetic modification, and using science and technology to make food easier to grow for in needing less water for places. And then there are others that would say that, you know, we don't know the long term implications of people eating that kind of unnatural food, and we could be poisoning developing nations through this. Do you have any insights into into that? So   29:45 I   Jonathan Crane  29:47 I'm disinclined to, to speak about a particular company. Just because I don't know enough about what say Monsanto or other seed companies do. But it is, I think, right to say that we need to have a sincere conversation about the centralization of seeds for farming practices. That is a complicated story that needs to be investigated from a variety of different disciplinary approaches. But we also need to recognize that climate change is real. And people need to feed themselves in a sustainable fashion no matter where they are in the world. And that if science can help by creating drought resistant or flood resistant crops, then though those are goods, we don't want to put so many regulations on genetically modifying organisms, that it puts a chilling effect on these kinds of research programs. So there are goods that can be done with genetically modified technologies, in certain places at certain times.   Zack Jackson  31:17 I tend to be in that camp, as well. I also tend to be somebody who trust science a little bit too much. Maybe just recognizing that technology is only as as good as the benevolence of the of the people wielding it. Well, on that point, I'm   Jonathan Crane  31:35 teaching a course here at Emory called immoral medicine. We're looking at the Nuremberg medical trials in 1946 47, about what the Nazis notoriously did during World War Two to their own citizens to indigenous non German citizens, both in their clinics, their communities, as well as, obviously in the concentration camps. And the vast majority of their victims in these biomedical experiments were Jews and political prisoners. But I   32:07 the   Jonathan Crane  32:08 one of the things that we're coming to really appreciate in this course, is that the Nazis were very much guided by a utilitarian ethic that they wanted to do what was best for the state. And because that was their that was their ultimate goal that justify that goal justified any means it justified doing heinous things to innocent victims, I so we do need to be wary about science, that is unbridled, unregulated, pursuing science or knowledge, just for the sake of knowledge is a good but if it is done without any kind of ethical constraints, it can unfortunately, history shows us It can lead to disastrous AI programs of investigation and also results. Right.   Zack Jackson  33:10 Now, I mean, I think they argued that they they were operating under a certain ethic, a certain ethic that the individual suffering is not as important as the greater good, which I mean, many in the world that argue is an not ethical ethic. How do we, how do we police ethics,   Jonathan Crane  33:34 by continuing to put it on the public's radar, we need to have conversations about what our values are, and to have ongoing conversations about what are our convictions? What should be our commitments. This is true not only in the science arena, and not only true in the food arena and public health arena, but it's also true in our social arena. What what sort of values should be guiding our commitments to vulnerable populations. We need to have these conversations from time to time and they're going to be uncomfortable, and we need to be comfortable sitting in that discomfort as individuals and as a society but to defer to political elites to defer to academic elites. And I'm putting elites in air quotes. By delegating or relegating certain kinds of conversations to others, we absolve ourselves of participating in these conversations that necessarily should involve as many people as possible.   Zack Jackson  34:48 So changing gears a little bit. What was it that led you initially to the Sinai and Synapses fellowship?   Jonathan Crane  34:58 Somebody who's interested In religion and contemporary issues, the the tensions, the dynamic relationship between religion and science is, has been there from the very beginning. And it's as alive as ever. So this is perhaps the best venue to too, to interact with clergy, professionals, academic policy, people, science people, it everybody's curious about how best to appreciate the wisdom that is derived from religious traditions, as well as insights that can be derived from scientific explorations of the world.   Zack Jackson  35:45 Has there been anything in in this fellowship that has surprised you   Jonathan Crane  35:51 the the ease with which it is possible to relate in deep ways with people who come from different religious communities as well as different scientific commitments that I have found for the many years that I've now been involved with Sinai and Synapses. That the people are really genuinely nice and curious and welcoming, and generous, and willing to hear somebody else's perspective, even if they don't necessarily agree with it, or even fully understand it. And that's been really refreshing, especially in this middle, you this contemporary political milieu here in the United States, where people demean and damn others who are not waving the same kind of flag that they were with.   Zack Jackson  36:55 Yeah, thing that's the main criteria for admission into the fellowship is you must be curious and kind. So as we approach the end of our time together, I want to ask you one final question, feel free to take as much time as you need. The question I've asked every other fellow before you. And that is, what is one thing that you wish everyone knew about the world.   Jonathan Crane  37:23 That it's vast. It's big. And because it's so big, you can zoom out and look at it from 30,000 feet, and still only see a fraction of it. And you can zoom in and take a microscope to it and dig deep down. But you're only going to see a tiny fraction of it to It's big. And that's when I talk about the world being big. I'm talking about not just the natural world, which is awesome, and intricate, and fragile. But I'm also talking about the social world. It's also variegated, and complicated. And I'm also talking about the world that's within each one of us. There's so much within each person that is still a mystery, to be experienced and to be appreciated. And that's one of the things that I hope that all folks can come to really appreciate is that you can learn new things about yourself. may not be things that you want to be learning may not be things that you're proud of about yourself, and the things that you might want to change. But there is always something new to learn about oneself if you are willing to pay attention to it. So the world is vast. And I really do hope that people are willing to be courageous explorers. Hmm.   Zack Jackson  38:52 Thank you for that. That is essentially the synopsis of the book that I've been writing about. Well, thank you so, so much for being here, and for sharing some of the work that you're doing some of the passion that drives you, and thank you for the work that you are doing through the fellowship, and I look forward to Reading and hearing more about what you do.   Jonathan Crane  39:18 Well, thank you so much, Zack. It's been a real pleasure and delight talking with you today.

Episode 81 What do robotic Torah scribes, Bluetooth rosaries, and a decapitated hitchhiking robot have in common? They're all teaching us what it means to be spiritual beings in the 21st century. Whether we like it or not, smart, adaptive technology is working its way into our religious and spiritual lives. Will we use it thoughtfully to enhance our lives or will it just become another technological nuisance? We're still in the early days of AI, and our actions today will have an outsized impact on how it develops. Let's be intentional, thoughtful, and prayerful about how we shepherd its growth, and become the sorts of people that Hitchbot would be proud to call friends.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    Show Notes To read: 1) The church of AI https://www.wired.com/story/anthony-levandowski-artificial-intelligence-religion/ 2) Robot religious functions https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/9/9/20851753/ai-religion-robot-priest-mindar-buddhism-christianity 3) Funerals for robotic companions https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/09/funerals-for-fallen-robots/279861/ 4) AIBO funerals and our humanity https://www.discovermagazine.com/technology/robot-funerals-reflect-our-humanity 5) Can robots pray (and a super creepy monk)...we didn’t talk about this, but it is still a fascinating part of the conversation https://aeon.co/essays/can-a-robot-pray-does-an-automaton-have-a-soul-ai-and-theology-meet 6) Values-based AI https://slate.com/technology/2019/11/priest-rabbi-robot-walk-into-bar-religion-technology.html 7) The Southern Baptist Convention principles on AI (again, didn’t talk about this in particular but it is creative and proactive rather than reactive) https://slate.com/technology/2019/04/southern-baptist-convention-artificial-intelligence-evangelical-statement-principles.html  8) Hitchbot (wiki) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HitchBOT  9) Social Credit system used in China (wiki article) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System  10) 5min video on what the Social credit system looks like https://www.reddit.com/r/TheGoodPlace/comments/a719ko/s1e1_chinas_social_credit_system_resemblance_to/ 11) Point system in the Good place https://howard-chai.medium.com/a-look-at-the-moral-point-system-of-the-good-place-7858215fd9dc 12) Opportunity’s last words and goodbye tributes https://laist.com/2019/02/16/jpl_mars_rover_opportunity_battery_is_low_and_its_getting_dark.php   Transcript This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.    Zack Jackson 00:04 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are   Rachael Jackson 00:14 Rachel Jackson Rabbi at Agoudas Israel congregation in Hendersonville, North Carolina. And my favorite fictional robotic companion is Data from Star Trek Next Generation.   Zack Jackson 00:30 Zack Jackson UCC pastor in Reading, Pennsylvania, and my favorite fictional robotic companion is Marvin the Paranoid Android from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.   Ian Binns 00:42 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte. And my favorite is R2D2   Kendra Holt-Moore 00:51 Kendra Holt-Moore PhD candidate at Boston University. And my favorite fictional robot companion is also Data. Because I just started watching Star Trek, and I love him.   Rachael Jackson 01:07 Resistance is futile Welcome on board.   Zack Jackson 01:12 I don't think she's gotten that far yet.   Rachael Jackson 01:13 No, not that don't be fine.   Zack Jackson 01:15 Well that'll be funny in a couple weeks.   Rachael Jackson 01:20 Okay, so thank you for that question. I'm glad that we were able to start there. And as we are doing our AI series, and I wanted to talk about this in a slightly different way than we have been talking about it. So previously, we've talked about transhumanism and cyborgs. And really, what is the concept? Last time we talked about this, we really focused on education. And so today, I really wanted to focus our conversation on religion, right, what is AI in relation to religion, and that in and of itself is a huge topic. But I want to start with an example from my tradition. And this example, is the use of ritual of a particular ritual object and how, how it appears. So I'll go into a little bit of detail there. In Judaism, we read the five the five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers in Deuteronomy, from a scroll, rather than from a Codex form. And the scroll form doesn't have vowels. It doesn't have punctuation marks doesn't have page numbers. So it can be very complicated to read. And not only that, it's extremely complicated to write. It takes a scribe who's working on parchment, which is animal skin, with using a quill dipped in special ink, writing on this paper, and the letters have to be extremely precise, and everything the columns are justified. And if anyone has ever tried to hand write in justified columns, it's so crazy hard. So sometimes the letters look really long, or sometimes the letters are really squished and it's just it's a very laborious, intensive intensive in terms of time but intensive also in terms of emotional and and frankly redundancy. And for for a good scribe or for a professional scribe, a year to a year and a half is what it takes full time to write a Torah. And then each of the peaches, pieces of parchment are stitched together rolled up and Mazel Tov we have we have a scroll. I don't want to necessarily give an estimate, because I don't want to undersell those that are that are paying for this. They're a brand new one is anywhere between 40 and $80,000. Just Just to give a Yeah. Wow.   Zack Jackson 04:05 Yeah, I guess you're paying the wages for a year.   Rachael Jackson 04:08 You're paying the wages, you're also paying, like parchment is animal skin, like that's not cheap. And these use, you know, many, many animals. Again, it depends on the size of the parchment and the kind of animal if you're using, like, goat skin, how many pieces of parchment you can get per goat, like it's, it's a lot.   Kendra Holt-Moore 04:30 How big is the finished product.   Rachael Jackson 04:32 So the parchment itself can vary. It's anywhere between, say 18 and 36 inches tall. Right, so top to bottom, and of course, there's a there's borders around it so that you're not just touching the scroll every time so 18 to 36 inches. Our synagogue is lucky enough to have three scrolls of various sizes, and then you put them on wooden die. You stitch them into wooden dowels and roll them up that way. And so when you're actually scrolling the scroll, you're using the wooden dowels to move, you know, literally go through the parchment that way and that way, of course, we, we make it pretty, because everything needs jewelry. And so we put a beautiful gown on top of it, and we put some finishing touches on it, and then the pointer because you're never supposed to actually touch it. And so the thing that you're carrying around our largest one is about 50 pounds, and is over four feet tall. You know, Tao is over four feet and over 50 pounds.   Kendra Holt-Moore 05:34 It's massive.   Rachael Jackson 05:35 Yeah, they're massive write these and no, of course, there are small ones, right, you can get one that's about 12 inches, but they're extremely hard to write, which actually makes the cost go up because like you're doing tiny print then and,   Kendra Holt-Moore 05:48 and then you also have to buy a magnifying glass to rewrite.   Rachael Jackson 05:51 They're really hard to read because like I said, No vowels, no punctuation. Really hard to read.   Ian Binns 05:58 So, gosh, that sounds like an awful lot of work. Can I interrupt? Of course, is it required? Or maybe required is not the right word. But does every synagogue? Have one? That is the goal? Yes. Okay, so the goal is very, but it's not like, there's not anything written in where it says for you. It's pretty much.   Rachael Jackson 06:19 It's pretty much it's pretty much there. Yeah, it's not that you have to. But how do you read from the Torah, if you don't have one? Right? I mean, you're reading from a Codex of Hamas, a Torah, write a paper Torah. But like, if you're going to do it, like the best you can do is do it well. And so sometimes there's like loans like, oh, there's a little small synagogue over here that doesn't have one, we'll loan it to you for, you know, 30 years or something,   Ian Binns 06:44 do you have like, Are any of those in your office where you're in our worship space,   Rachael Jackson 06:50 oh, they're all in the sanctuary. And they're all under a locked cabinet. And they are all there is a fire a smoke detector inside the ark where we keep them. And the fire department knows that, that save those, like, if you're here for a fire, go right there. And we'll deal with the rest of the building. Like they're really they're that important, like they are the most important thing in the synagogue. So parchment and scribing is expensive and intensive. So the question is, will then why do it? Right? Like, why have a person do this, we've had printing presses for hundreds of years at this point. And okay, so you don't want to print the toy because you can't really it's hard to do printed to our on parchment. Okay, but now when the 21st century, and the 21st century, we can have a mechanical hand, actually write the Torah, and it can use a parchment, it can use the special ink and it just once you program it in there with all the specifications, this AI robot can write the Torah. So why wouldn't we have that and once you've put in the the capital of programming it, you just go right, you don't have to you don't have to change it up. So many times, you don't have to repay the programmer. Every time you just say, Nope, we just need more parchment more ink. Alright, so if we're still doing a halakhically, what is the role of the person? What does the person bring to this, that a robot can't or a and I'm using AI in this a not just a robot, because as I was saying, like, they can be different size parchments, the column width can be different. So you have to you have to teach the robot or the robot has to know what what justification in this, you know, full justified center justified looks like and so it has to know looking at the parchment, so it has to learn not just be programmed. So that's how I'm using AI as opposed to just a robot program. And there's a female scribe, which is a whole different category of, you know, egalitarianism and feminism that we won't get into this particular episode, but there's a female scribe, and Julia seltzer, who with I think it was five other women scribed an entire Torah together like each one of them took most of a book, Deuteronomy is really long. And then they stitched it together. And what she noticed is that their handwriting was different, that someone might have had like a little bit more of a flourish when they made the crown on a letter or a little bit like maybe one looked a little blockier and the other one looked a little bit softer, that looks different and you know, the person behind it and so now you're like I don't I don't study the scribe but there aren't that many in the world and there there haven't been so if you know the age and the location of the tour that you have You know, the person who scribed it, there is a story, there are memories, there is an intention behind it, there is an awareness of what you're doing. And that awareness doesn't exist in AI and robots. There's a prayer in Judaism, which says, Thank you like in the mornings, thank you for my soul. And thank you for the awareness of my soul. And it's that extra step that I think is missing, when we're looking at what can I do, as far as religion is concerned? So I just wanted to open up with the tour and saying it would be far cheaper, and far more accurate if we chose to do this sort of robotic arm AI printing than using a person. But it's not just about the money, right? in religion, it's not just what is the bottom line? Right? That's, that's one of the things that makes religious organizations different than, you know, other businesses or for profit centers. And I'm being kind that religions are not for profit centers, and sort of being generous to religion as a concept, in those ways, that it's not about doing it the cheapest and fastest. So what is it about? So when we look at again, using the example of writing the Torah? What What is it? So that's where I wanted to start. And so that's when one place for my tradition of where AI could be used, but we're choosing not to use it and wondering if there are places that you could see, either as an object or as a ritual in and of itself, from your traditions, or you are understandings that could or could not be substituted with AI?   Zack Jackson 12:00 Yeah, so there's a product that you can purchase from the Vatican itself. That is basically a Fitbit. For your your rosary.   12:14 Yes, I   Zack Jackson 12:14 saw that, were you It's great, because it's got its own little charging station, and you pick it up, and you make the sign of the cross on it. And that activates it. And then it's able to tell by the weighted beads, and for those of you who maybe aren't as familiar with rosary has a certain amount of beads. And the point is to hold a bead while you say a prayer, and then move to the next bead. While you say a prayer. It's a physical act while you're doing a spiritual act, in order to connect the full body to engage all of your senses, and to help you keep track of what you're doing while you're doing it. Because like, if you're saying a prayer a number of times in a row, how are you going to keep track? Like, do you lose track, you know, like, well, I guess I got to start over again, or start writing it down or something. So the rosary has long been a helpful tool for people. But in this one, it now syncs up to your phone, and can remind you, if you haven't been doing your prayers, or reward you, if you have been doing your prayers. Have you know, there might be social functions where you can encourage each other, I know that there was by the Bible gateway app, introduced a social aspect to it. And then suddenly, I started getting notifications like crazy, where all of my friends were like, connect with so and so on Bible gateway and share your daily devotional, your practice your reading. And so then that now there's this kind of social pressure, that now everyone knows what I'm reading. And now I have to make sure I'm reading extra spiritual stuff. Make sure everyone else knows how spiritual I am. And so there are some issues with that. I think we're now it Jesus says, practice your religion in secret, don't let your left hand know what your right hand is doing. If possible, go into a closet where no one knows you're there. He says that if you are fasting, not to put on sackcloth and ashes and let everyone know that you're super spiritual, but to put on your Sunday best and act like everything is normal. So nobody knows. And so a lot of these we talked last time about the gamification of education and other things. And so when you have sort of the gamification of, of religious practice, then I don't know, you start to want to show off a little bit or feel that social pressure that a lot of the church because of, you know, but I don't know, I've never used one of these. So maybe they're great. I do love love. All gadgets. That's fascinating. That's,   Rachael Jackson 15:03 that's a great word gadget. Right? It's using tech to encourage a particular practice. And one of the pitfalls, I think, is when we make that practice public, the Fitbit idea, right, you can have your own Fitbit, and not tell anybody, by the way, and you can set your own, you can set your own, like, tell it get up every 10 minutes or get up at you know, 10 minutes every hour, or whatever it is, and you don't have to tell people, but then we get that bias built in of whoever is creating the software, whoever is creating the technology, what is their value system. Sort of like the zoo, I didn't, I never joined the Bible gateway group, nor did a join this other way that I'm going to say, covenant eyes, right? Like basically, where you can have a person, double check your browser history, to make sure that you're staying on the up and up the accountability of what you're looking at on the internet. And as we all know, the internet was created for porn. So if the internet is created for porn, then your covenant eyes need to make sure you're not doing that. I'm being a little flippant, but maybe not that much. But that then turns into, it could turn into a race of I am holier than thou Look at, look at how much I'm doing and posturing and buckling under peer pressure, and then you're losing that that authenticity, and then suddenly, it's just besting each other, which kind of goes against most religious tenants from most religions that I'm aware of, right, like, look how better I am than you are at this. But building in that value system, and I think that's, that's the really dark gray area that could get pretty twisted, when we look at AI because at this point, at least, there is not sentience and choice in AI, which means it's all about the person who's programming it and the values that they're using. Yeah, I   Kendra Holt-Moore 17:45 think it's interesting, the examples that we're talking about are, seems to be examples of what AI takes away from us, or from religious traditions, whether that's like authenticity, or, you know, like not not having a person's story behind a tourist scroll. But instead, it being you know, a robot that has like standard handwriting and all these things, or, you know, the rosary gadget that, you know, for whatever reason, there's something that we feel is missing from these rituals and relationships. And I like that all makes a lot of sense to me. But I was really struck by one of the articles that Rachel shared with us before our meeting today, and it was an article in The Atlantic called funerals for fallen robots. Yes. And that that piece was just like highlighting the emotional attachment that people have for robots and how we, you know, the, the emphasis here is not so much on like, the nature of AI itself. I mean, it is a little bit, but it's more about, I think it's more about, like how humans create themselves, like the creation of the self through relationship with objects, which is something we've always done like before robots, but it's so interesting to me, because it's like, is that something is that like, what the flip side of AI is, we gain a lot by having potentially these robots, or, you know, even if it's just like a gadget, you know, like, I definitely have emotional attachments to like random objects, just like little tokens on my desk, because of the person who gave it to me. Or, you know, I have like a pouch of these. I call them my study tokens. They're just like little random buttons and pins and rocks and little figurines that people have given to me and I set them around my computer sometimes when I like really need to Get in the zone. And you know, they're not robots, but it's like this like emotional attachment with these inanimate like metal and rock objects on my desk. And I would be so sad if I lost any one of these things. And so I think it's like a very similar kind of relationship that if we look at robots and AI, like we can still form those kinds of attachments, and they might even be deeper, if AI is mimicking the kinds of like, human effect and human thought. And I just think that's so interesting, because it I, there was a long time where I thought, like, my gut reaction is that oh, well, that's still kind of empty, though. Like, it doesn't mean anything. And then like, the older I get, and the more I've like, thought about this, especially as technology just changes, I think that's like, I think it's really a powerful relationship, even though it's very weird to think about. But like, if I had a robot, and it was like, you know, r two D two, or data or you know, any, any of our like, famous robot companions from any fictional universe, yeah, I would want to, like protect that robot friend, and make sure that it was charged every day and make sure that it was like, happy and whatever, since that robots can be happy. And I think that that whatever, whatever we can say about the realness or not realness of that relationship, I think what's true about it is that it changes who we are. And it reflects something about who we are and who we are becoming. Because everything that we have a relationship with in the world plays on or, you know, helps to create the virtues that we have the weaknesses that we have the personalities that we have. And I just think that's really cool. And really interesting, because it doesn't have to just be with humans. And that's always been the case.   Zack Jackson 22:02 I that. I think we need to take a second and pour one out for hich bot while we're at it. Do you remember hitch bought? No. So it was a an adorable two young little robot from but too young. It was like 1013   Kendra Holt-Moore 22:22 Is it like a Tamagotchi?   Zack Jackson 22:24 No in 2013. So eight years ago, these developers in Canada made this robot and they made it to kind of look junkyard chic is how they called it, where it was cylindrical body. And it's got these like pool noodle arms and legs and this adorable little face. And the point of it was an social experiment to see if robots could trust humans. So it can't walk. But it can talk. And it was equipped with 3g connection and GPS, so that it could update its own social media accounts. And it could talk to the people who interacted with it and ask them to hitch a ride to the next place. And encourage them to like talk back to it had some rudimentary AI so it could communicate with people like a chatbot. And people would take pictures with it, it would be such an honor to like stumble upon hitch bot, and you get to update your social media and be like, I dropped it off here. And now the next person picks it up. It went across Canada three different times. I think. It went across Germany and the Netherlands.   Rachael Jackson 23:35 And then it just went the second one went across Germany.   Zack Jackson 23:38 Okay, but in 2015 tried to go across the US but got decapitated in Philly. Because Because Billy and if you were to ask me, somebody who's lived in Philly, and is from south south Jersey, where it would have been killed, I would have told you it would have been Philadelphia.   Rachael Jackson 24:04 Also, just just to add to that, it only its goal was to start in Boston. I remember Following this, it was it started in Boston and was going to get to San Francisco, got decapitated in Philly. And the head was never found. Like it didn't even it's not like it started in San Francisco. No, it started in Boston, and only got to Philly.   Zack Jackson 24:29 It had made it out of the East Coast or totally would have gotten there. It would have gotten there. If you can make it out of the East Coast, then you're okay.   Rachael Jackson 24:37 Ichabod I love what you're saying. Right? Like this idea of what is our attachment both from an emotional standpoint or she's made from an individual standpoint, but then also a cultural right like this poor hitch bot was totally fine and the Netherlands and Germany and Canada and the US we were like I don't trust you. Yeah. decapitate. Wow, season four of shields calculating things. So but what? What does that say about us and our relationship? And I think that's also what you were saying Kendra, right? This, this funeral for a bow AI Bo. I might be mispronouncing it. But that's how I had heard it. Right, these these robotic dogs. And it's true that even in the military people that have military companions, robotic companions, there's a sadness there. I mean, there was there was a famous movie, it wasn't a robot. But oh, Castaway. Right, Tom Hanks and Wilson, the volleyball, right there were weird, I think the movie was quiet for what 40 minutes, there was no dialogue or something like that, something crazy like that. And we were all just like, we'll setting like, we'll set it like we were just like something. And we had this immense attachment to a movie volleyball. No, it's just, it was so powerful, in fact, could create how much of the more so something has been there, watching your back, if something has been there carrying you on. And so many of us use objects as tools, right, that I don't have a deep attachment to my laptop or to my phone, like I use them, but I don't have an emotional attachment. My son, who's who's almost seven has had the same Kindle for, I guess we got him three years ago. And he has an emotional attachment to his Kindle, like he cares for it, he makes sure that it's in the right place, he makes sure that it's clean, he's sad, when it doesn't work, he makes sure that it's it's charged so that he can carry it with them. Like, it's very different than I need to use this as a tool, right. And so for me, we're able to use a AI or technology, we're using those a little interchangeably, as an ability to start forming relationships and bonds that teach us about who we are. And in religion, it's my, it's my understanding that one of the things that religion does, is teach us and help us with relationships, relationships, and in all, in all dimensions. And and I say that in the horizontal, it teaches us how to be in relationship with the world around us and those within the world around us, including ourselves, it is a vertical relationship, such that we have a relationship with the past and the future. And it's also the z axis relationship, which to me is the Divinity or spiritual aspect, right. So if we're on an X, Y, Z axis, the z axis would be the godly aspect. Or however each religion chooses to understand that which is not known. But it's, it's all relationships as almost as a stark difference from facts. And so if AI can teach us those things, or teach us how to do those things, or encourage those things, or grow those things, I think it can be a beautiful relationship, which is a couple of the other articles that that I'll post in the show notes, or I'll have Zack post in the show notes. So I think that there's beauty in there, what we need to make sure that when we're using them, and they're using us, that we recognize the values and that we trust what's in front of us. And I think that's an important piece that we're not that we haven't fully fully digested. How do we gain this trust? Right, so so Zack brought in the hitch bot, where it couldn't trust Americans and Americans couldn't trust it. And it is no longer, right. How do we develop the trust, which is the foundation of relationships?   Kendra Holt-Moore 29:17 Yeah. And I think that it's interesting to think about the trust that we can develop with these, you know, Ai, whatever technology, we're talking about these emotional attachments, and how that's a really different that's a really different relationship to these objects than talking about whether or not AI and you know, future robots will deserve rights. Which is like really interesting, because I think there's a natural blending of those ideas where over time, if we're treating something like we're In a relationship with it in the same way we would be with the human. That conversation to me kind of feels a note inevitable. I don't know, like what the answer will end up being. But, you know, like, that's already a conversation of like, Can robots? Or should robots who are more like Android in nature? Should they be granted citizenship, which is just like, so crazy to think about, but I think is, you know, is going to be a conversation that's like, way more prominent, like way down the line in the future when we do have robots that are a lot more like us. But for now, I think it's a lot easier actually, to ask the question of like, how can we trust the technology that's in front of us? Because that feels a little bit more manageable? I think, still a really hard question, because you have to think about the ethics of, and the values that go into programming. And that's like a huge debate to have about the, you know, the cultural code of the robot in front of you, and how that conflicts with whoever's using it or interacting with it. So still really difficult. But it's, I think, still maybe a little bit more manageable than talking about, like robot citizenship.   Zack Jackson 31:45 Have you all heard about what's going on in China with the social credit scores?   Rachael Jackson 31:50 Oh, yes. Oh, it's so scary,   Ian Binns 31:53 I want you to unpack that for us. Because that was interesting,   Zack Jackson 31:55 a way of, of using AI, especially, to keep humans in line. While they're already well known for their facial recognition, and the fact that there's cameras everywhere, and that those cameras are always tracking who you are and where you are, and what you're doing.   Rachael Jackson 32:15 Said, right and said with pride that I think it was that once you enter the public sphere, meaning not your own home, within three seconds, it can identify their entire population, like 1.4 billion people within three seconds.   Ian Binns 32:33 That was crazy,   Zack Jackson 32:35 which sure helped to keep the COVID under control, but also their populace. And so they've been doing these trial runs, in some places have adopted them more thoroughly, where they're essentially keeping record of each individual person and giving that person a score based on their trustworthiness. So things that might negatively impact your social credit rating might be things like playing loud music, or eating food on Rapid Transit when you're not supposed to, or jaywalking or speeding, or this is a good one, making reservations at a restaurant and then not showing up. Oh, yeah, I'm not correctly sorting your recycling. And if your score gets too low, you might be denied things. Like, I think I read that there was like 80,000 people so far, who had not been able to get on trains, because their social score was too low, and they couldn't be trusted on it. And if you want to get out of that, it takes like two to five years to get out of that. Or you can work really hard to raise your score. By doing things like donating to charity, or giving blood or volunteering or praising the government on social media.   Ian Binns 34:06 I feel like 10s of millions of Americans would have been screwed during the last administration.   Zack Jackson 34:10 Right? Yeah. So like, if you want good things like, you know, a line of credit to buy a house or favorable terms on loans, or getting   Rachael Jackson 34:22 a reservation at a restaurant   Zack Jackson 34:24 or getting a reservation at a restaurant, like you'd better make sure that your social social score is high. And this is, I mean, this is also a society that as is a shame, shame and honor based society. And so kind of taking advantage of that. In order to control the populace, using opaque artificial intelligence like No, nobody, this is not open source data. This is stuff that's tracking your every single movement, so you might be out walking Down the street somewhere, and you reach in your pocket to get your phone and a receipt falls out your pocket, and you get docked for littering, because it knows what you just did. And it was watching you. And supporters of this. say that this is going to be a way of creating a utopian society where like plenty of people will just do the right thing, because it's the right thing to do. Do these   Kendra Holt-Moore 35:24 dystopian literature come on over?   Rachael Jackson 35:28 China, they don't have it. Yeah, it's not an   Zack Jackson 35:32 like, this will finally do what religion failed to do. In keeping the people in line and making a morally just society, because it offers punishments that are immediate, and felt instead of like, afterlife based.   Rachael Jackson 35:49 Yeah. And daily and daily life. impactful, right? Not just, yeah, eventually, one day, this will come back to bite you. And that took us, but like, Oh, I can't get on the bus today. Like, oh, that has impacted my life. And this is like, I'm wondering, did they ride? Or did they take notes from the good place? With this feels, this feels very much like the scores that people are getting based on their activities. And one of the things that I am troubled by, in this just one of very many things I'm troubled by with this whole scenario is we don't actually know the end result of a single action. So let's just take the littering on on the face of it. That seems like a pretty like, we'd all kind of get behind that. Right? Like, you don't want to litter like I'm not a fan of littering, and we talk about it and we don't want to do it. And sometimes Adrian IO and you know, his friends will go pick up the litter that we find in the in the park. Right, littering. I'm totally behind that. In this particular society, as far as I have read, and I, I could be corrected, please. Having clean streets is really important. Right that there's there is a value in the in the culture of having clean public spaces, in order to have clean public spaces. Somebody has to do that job. So if somebody accidentally litres, and then they get docked for it, then people stop littering. How many jobs did that cost? There was no intent behind the littering. But the accidental littering or the wind took it away. How many jobs did that cost? And what are the life what is the life like for those people whose job was to literally be a human a street sweeper. And, and those ramifications, that we're not able to see the human cost? Again, minus the whole dystopian issue, but that to be docked for something that seems dockable. But we don't know where this where this is going. That's where I'm uncomfortable with this, like, how far are we going? Oh,   Kendra Holt-Moore 38:19 but on the other hand, maybe we should just let the robots take all of our jobs so that we can just focus on our hobbies and have universal basic income. Am I right?   Rachael Jackson 38:29 Totally. Right. I just want to start doing more cross stitching. So yes, I am 100% on board with just take my job. Right? But   Kendra Holt-Moore 38:38 but we got to have the infrastructure like you're right. That's not where we are right now. But I hope one day, we can all have our hobbies, and money and just like live our lives because work   Zack Jackson 38:50 shouldn't be all I mean, according to will robots take my job calm. I'm only point 8% likely that clergy will be replaced by AI and robots,   Rachael Jackson 39:01 right. And we have seen that so very clearly in this last year. Because the people that have been in hospitals or have died or have had a funeral, or have had any sort of life cycle moment in which they want their clergy there, in addition to whatever worship we have on the weeks, there's no comparison and holding someone's hand. That, yeah, it'd be great if a robot did my job, but I don't think a robot could do my job. Right? Because there's something about the touch. There's something about the human connection. There's something about the look in a person's eyes that says, I see you and I empathize with whatever you're going through. That we haven't gotten there yet with AI and while the technical aspects of most of our jobs could be done I think even the jobs where it's a 95%, your job could be done by AI, or robot. It's not going to be a healthy thing. Because Where are we getting those relationships? Sorry, and I'm talking about   Ian Binns 40:15 that's okay. I'm just makes me think about like, if we think about so instead of just, you know, a thought experiment, I guess on what are the things in our so not necessarily to take our entire job? But what are the things within our particular professions? That if robots or AI took over that aspect profession, what would free us up to do more of beautiful things? We could do more? Still still with your profession? Yes, hobbies? Definitely. But like, so for me. And I know, we brought this up in the last episode. For me, especially it's like grading, for example. You know, if there were robots or you know, something like that, that could I mean, obviously, it's easier now than it used to be because of technology. But if that was a way where it can be fully programmed to do all of that for me, then what? There are other, I'm certain that there, it will give me time to do other things.   Rachael Jackson 41:18 Really? Okay, I'm gonna push you on that one a little bit. The reason I say that, barring Scantron tests, which are stupid. Good. Sorry, for those that I'm offending that do. I feel like you get to know your student based on the answers, they give in the questions, that you're losing something when you don't grade their papers. You're losing, how they're thinking you're losing. And what what creativity are they coming up with? And so, so I would say, if you're not doing that, you're not seeing the individual? What are if, if that part is taken away by robots, which I'm not quite sure how you would do that equitably? I would have to be a pretty smart robot to try to grade individual questions that aren't Scantron based, or that multiple choice, how else would you then get to know the students like that, to me isn't where you spend the time, right? in getting to know like, having coffee shop our having, you know, let's sit down and chat for 20 minutes, just because like the 20 minutes, I would have spent grading your essays. Now let's just talk about them. But I don't I don't know how you could equitably do that, honestly. And also,   Ian Binns 42:42 what I'm curious about is though, that, to me, is still less thinking in the same way that things are done now. Like I'm almost pushing us to think, what other avenues could it open. If some skill, some things like that, that can become very time consuming. I'm not saying already, like, there are definitely parts that I would still need to do as human. But I think there are some things that may make it where I could end up spending more time on other tasks and other ways of getting to know students and connecting with him. potentially even more fully.   Zack Jackson 43:22 Yeah.   Ian Binns 43:23 So all by all the grading, it's okay. So I'm just curious, like, Are there ways within your professions that there are some mundane things that you're just like, you know, what, if I could get rid of that imagine I would have more time on this,   Rachael Jackson 43:38 you know, what I gotta say, I have predictive text set up on my Gmail. And I have had it set up on my like, I've been using the same gmail account for work for six years. I'm pretty like I change it up, I don't, I don't write the same exact same thing every time. But I have a particular way of talking in email. I have a particular rabbinic voice or a style that's in email, just like when you if any of you were to ever talk to me on the phone, and and I pick up and I say, Hello, this is Robert Jackson, you hear my voice go up by about half an octave. It is amazing. Um, so I have that same sort of tick quality characteristic in my email. And so now when I'm writing an email, it will the predictive text will have almost the entire sentence written if I write one or two words, and I go, yeah, that's what I want. tab, tab, tab. And next thing you know, my entire email is written in two minutes rather than six. And so as a person who writes enter between 20 and 50 emails, writes 20 to 50 emails a day. That's that's been helpful, right? It's it's freed me up to have the conversation with someone in person.   Zack Jackson 45:19 I think a database that would help keep track of who is sick? Who is? Well, who is recovered? And who's related to who would be really helpful?   Rachael Jackson 45:35 Oh, I have that for you, I can send you the link. I well.   Zack Jackson 45:38 So one that that can also like predict things. I'm thinking AI wise, where, like, I know that this person has this condition, this condition and has been in the hospital this amount of time this amount of time. And then so you might want to check in on this person at this time. You know, have you talked with so and so lately? They haven't been in church? Oh, yeah. Okay, that's a good point, there's probably something going on. Because like, my mind personally doesn't work like that. I cannot hold on to details about individual people. Especially when I have that many people. Were I think, like, Oh, I haven't seen that person in six weeks, because I've been with the other people. And I haven't thought about it, or Oh, yeah, that's right, they did get COVID last month, and I never checked back in on them. I wonder how they're doing now like that kind of a thing, connected with the local hospitals, which could update me on people's medical conditions, as well as like death of relatives who maybe aren't members of my church, like it's scanning through the obituaries of the local papers to be like, Oh, well, I have this member whose uncle just died. But they're not. The uncle is not a member of my church. And so now I know that maybe I should reach out to this person, like that kind of assistance and pastoral care would be really helpful, because nine times out of 10, I miss it. And then I realized after the fact that I could have been a comforting presence in that moment.   Rachael Jackson 47:08 Although I will just say, I do have an awesome pastoral care website that I use. And it's, it's super helpful. It's not AI. But it's really amazing to help me to help me do those exact same to do those things. Again, it doesn't connect to the hospitals. It doesn't it doesn't scan obituaries, but it helps. It's my own personal. It's my own personal pastoral care assistant. Well, we   Zack Jackson 47:33 have a lot of clergy who listen, what's the website,   Rachael Jackson 47:36 it's called notebaert. And ot e bi, rd note, bird. And it is awesome. And I'm happy to share this and happy to be a poster child's No, they're not paying me for any reason. I just love it.   Zack Jackson 47:49 But they could.   Rachael Jackson 47:53 Really, and and they are. They're totally non denominational. Like, they they listened to the Jews, and they put stuff in there for the Jews. But there's a whole bunch of stuff in there for Christians to like, I haven't, you know, communion wise, I didn't, I didn't look at all the Christian stuff, because I don't need to. And they're extremely responsive and wonderful. And I could just like sing their praises all day long. Because I think we're getting there, right? Like, we keep having these, these brainstorming so we can get there. And I think if we're not afraid of it, and I keep going back to what Kendra was saying, right, that that initially, we started talking about the drawbacks, and Ken was like, Hey, what about all the positives? Wait, it could be so great. It would like it would just be wonderful. If our values were there, right, the value of pastoral care would have to be there.   Kendra Holt-Moore 48:50 Yeah. And I think to like another way of thinking about, like how AI would like, you know, supplement people's jobs. It's not even that, like all of the things that we do in academia or as clergy. I don't, I don't really know how AI is gonna, like supplement what any of us do besides like what we're talking about now with, like databases, like technology stuff, sure. But I just think, like, there are a different category of jobs that AI can do. So that it like frees up people like maybe, maybe there will be more people who want to be clergy members, or like, you know, researchers and teachers. And since AI is doing, you know, the jobs that those people might have been doing now, we have all these people who want to do these jobs, but we don't have to work the whole year. Like maybe we're on a half year schedule. And then you know, we switch out and then the robot or not the robot that that People who would have been doing, I don't know, pick a job, what's a job that maybe AI is going to take over one day? I guess we use the idea of like the streets with images, or sandwiches? Yeah, sandwiches. You know, like, it just creates an abundance of like, time, I guess is what it's giving us, or like opportunity to do something that you might not have thought you were going to do. I don't know, it just there's, there's more ways to think about it than just that, like, yeah, robots gonna, like grade my papers or like, sit by someone on their deathbed. Because I don't I don't know if like that. There's something about that, that makes me like, like cringe a little bit, even though that's like also what we're talking about as a potential for being like really cool. And   Zack Jackson 50:51 COVID, they've had to do that. And I there are hospitals that have set up these like, iPad robots that kind of look humanoid, but they have an iPad for a head, where you can connect to people that you know, and that you love. There's even some more advanced technology out there that will have a hand on it. And then another hand will be held by your loved one who's maybe in the waiting room. And then like the two cents each other cool and will squeeze cool other sad   Rachael Jackson 51:20 at the same time.   Ian Binns 51:23 But necessary during times like a pandemic,   Zack Jackson 51:26 right? Yeah. Right. But given a normal circumstance, no one would choose that. Right.   Rachael Jackson 51:31 Right. And, you know, what I, what I hear you suggesting Kendra, too, is perhaps that technology AI as it gets there, again, using them interchangeably, allows us to really understand what we want our lives to be, especially as Americans who have been trained and our culture of just high productivity, like unbelievably high productivity that our value is based in what we produce. And then our value as a citizen, or as a person is how much effort we put into our company. Right? Whatever that as a worker, that's where it last. And so if we have the ability to, to have our job being done by something else, rather than replacing our job, like finding something else, as in was suggesting to do with that time for a job to say, great, it's done. Now I have time to be me. I to actually say it's not. Yes, maybe the average is a 40 Hour Workweek. But I don't really know anybody that does that. I don't, I don't I don't know of any salaried, that's untrue. I know of one salaried employee who works for the government, frankly, and they're the only ones that I know that's a salaried employee that actually sticks to 40 hours. The only reason I'm using the term salaried is because the employer then has to pay per hour and usually they don't want to pay overtime. And so they're they're battling this like well, you then you just have to be extremely highly productive in your hour. So that's why I'm separating out the hourly versus a salary because the the employer in that case is not willing to pay the the overtime wages often read that this 40 Hour Workweek and this idea of downtime being not a good thing. Right. So   Ian Binns 53:35 you think about like, the genius time or whatever, that or whatever it was that Google had, right, isn't it, you know, they that they didn't Google Earth, like the idea for Google Earth and the development of Google Earth? What came from someone having that? Like, didn't they have it as their job like 20% of the people's time was meant for them to just focus on thinking, yeah,   Zack Jackson 54:01 whatever. Certainly the work on certain engineers job. Yeah, they give freedom to they have like little play rooms, basically. Yeah, with little things to mess around with. And they encourage people to do that. And, yeah, but that's just for the engineers that are making things.   Ian Binns 54:16 Yeah, yeah. So when I was thinking, so this is I like that you mentioned that Rachel was still part of the job. So I guess for clarification, if there was a way that there that AI can help make some of the tasks of my job easier, right for me to then go in directions with my job in life that I couldn't have even imagined as a teacher. I would take that. Or just I know there could be some negatives there. Potentially, that that could be coming. But I would choose to initially focus on what are the things I could gain. Like that would give me the time to not have to worry about oh well. So When I'm recording this podcast, there are other things on my mind that I'm like, oh, man, I gotta get back to that someday, right? I would have to worry about that stuff. Right, I would have that time. And the things. So what I think about like within academia, so when we started this, the podcast idea, and we started running with it, and now we're doing it. And it's been almost two years, and I wouldn't trade for anything. And I'm not I'm not ready to leave it. I love doing this stuff. Right? One of the thoughts that had to go through my mind was is how do I write this down to make sure that my supervisors all the way up the chain in academia value it? And then you think about, so when you get new leadership, and they see that I'm writing on these areas that may not be as high research productivity? What does that mean? I don't care, because it's doing what I love to do. Right. And I still get to do the other things too. But that just means that now I'm adding more to my plate, which is fine. But I'm always thinking about when it comes to like, teachers. So there are ways you know, in this field of education, that could make it so that we could do some of those other things that people love to do that somehow to resolve the time or because of just exhaustion. Right? Yeah. So yeah, I think those are the things I would try out and just backing on my give that a shot, if it doesn't work, doesn't work, I try something different. So I don't think I would lose connection with the students. If I had some of those other tests that were a little bit easier for me to do at least less time consuming. Right, so that because I would use that time to plan for more different types of experiences in the classroom. When I'm thinking about class stuff, here are some different things that could potentially do in my classroom. Now, let me now got time to really plan it out. Let me run with it. That's how I would want to approach it. And it's funny while saying that the AI on my wrist was telling me, you look like you need to breathe right now. I guess my heart rate was going up.   Zack Jackson 57:06 I should think we we should all breathe, right? Yes, I know.   Ian Binns 57:09 But it says even a minute of deep breathing can be helpful. It's almost like a meditation reminder to meditate.   Rachael Jackson 57:17 Right? A reminder to to be, and I think we're at the point and perhaps perhaps it's just my limited imagination. And perhaps it's my limited vertical ability. I can't really see AI as like really intelligence. Right? Just really, I think I'm stuck in technology, and what that's doing. But I think and I hope that we have the ability to create things where where we are allowed to be human beings, not human doings. And that can be the focus. So however, we can get there, using the value systems that we have in places individuals or to whichever society and culture we ascribe of which many of us have overlapping ones, right, Amir for me, you know, feminist, and Jewish, and American and all that stuff, right, like overlapping, but what are what are my values they're in? And how can I use this technology in the AI to allow me to be a human being not just a human doing, and in that way, sort of living up to this idea that I myself, so there was a Zionist named a had her arm, which actually he changed his name, and it translates to one people. That's what that translates to, I had her um, he was writing in the late, late 19th, early 20th century, and he was defining the difference between sacred and profane. And that which is profane, is a means to an end. And when you get to the end, the object itself loses its meaning. And the sacred is that which the object itself can be used in lots of different ways to achieve many different ends and is, is by itself, by its nature, holy. And for me, that's what I want for the human being, not just the human doing, not that I am here, to do something, to do a job to do this, that and the other but to be and there and that being using the AI to create an imbue holiness in the self in whatever job we're in, whether that's in religion, whether that's an academia or any myriad of other fields that we've sort of, we've sort of touched on and when we're able to then bridge AI and religion in those ways we can see ourselves as holy that's, that's, that's my sort of my hero range. Bow in the sky hope   Kendra Holt-Moore 1:00:02 that what you're saying, Rachel, about bridging those those things is reminding me of. And this sort of ties back to a conversation earlier about religion and AI and like the funerals of robots and stuff like that. There was a late 19th century anthropologist, Eb Tyler, if you study religion, you probably know him. There's lots of like, problematic issues, we could talk about them. But the what he was writing about at that time was about animism, and had this idea that animism is like the original religion, and that it was also like a central characteristic of what he called a quote unquote, primitive religions. And so that's where we can like talk about, like colonialism and all that stuff. But the the idea of what he's talking about is that there is like this development of religion where you start out as being animistic, which, if you don't know, animism is like, basically put life or seeing that there's life or like a soul in inanimate objects or in things besides humans. So thinking that the river has a spirit, and the trees and the rocks have spirits. And so this is what Tyler's talking about. But it's interesting to me, because I, I was thinking, you know, even though someone like Tyler, or, you know, other anthropologists and people who would say like, oh, only primitive religions have animism or this idea of like, life and soul and inanimate objects, or like having these childish attachments to things. What we know or like, what, you know, if you study religion is that has nothing to do with like, this like line of progress, where like, the more advanced modernized religions don't have attachments, or don't have these ideas of life and spirit in nature or other inanimate objects. And I think like the prime, like piece of evidence for that right now in this conversation is that, you know, we can really be looking at the most, like technologically advanced places, and we're talking about how we, like throw a funeral or some other kind of celebration for our robot friend, and that it's just like this human impulse to relate to the world around us. And there's nothing that's like primitive about that, whether whether it's like animism in the traditional sense, or what we're talking about now, where we're relating to things in this new way, as technology changes. You know, our best friends are going to be robots one day, and it just is like, so interesting to see how humans are continually coming up with ways to relate to the world around us. So that's what I was thinking.   Zack Jackson 1:03:19 Yeah, it's the final words of, of the opportunity rover that struck a chord around the world that yes, you know, the opportunity rover, went for 15 years on Mars, way longer than it was supposed to the little rover that could, and then one final dust storm covered the, as far as we know, covered it up. And, you know, it's just sending telemetry data back and you know, just the battery's dying and whatnot. And somebody on Twitter, wrote, The last message they received was basically, My battery is low, and it's getting dark. And that phrase, then, like, went around the world. my battery's low, and it's getting dark. I've seen that tattooed on people. I've seen so many t shirts and mugs and like that little rover with its little solar panels, just alone on this distant cold planet. my battery's low and it's getting dark. Then there was like this worldwide morning for this little little rover guy. That will one day I'm sure be in a museum and those words I hope will be inscribed on it. So that we know that like this is a human connection. This isn't just a religion thing. This is a human connection.   Rachael Jackson 1:04:39 All the fields right the rest in peace   Zack Jackson 1:04:44 rest in peace which bot whose final we will   Rachael Jackson 1:04:49 find we will find your   Kendra Holt-Moore 1:04:52 your word   Zack Jackson 1:04:53 and avenge them. No, no, no hitch bought wouldn't want it that way. hitch Potts, fine. No tweets By the way, were August 1 2015. Oh dear, my body was damaged. But I live on with all of my friends.   Rachael Jackson 1:05:09 Sometimes that was funnier to me.   Zack Jackson 1:05:12 Sometimes bad things happen to good robots and then little bit later posted a picture of itself with its with its creators and said my trip must come to an end for now but my love for humans will never fade. Thank you friends.   Kendra Holt-Moore 1:05:31 me getting love should fade. A little little buddy.   Zack Jackson 1:05:35 Oh, no hitch BOD is the best of us.   Ian Binns 1:05:41 Data Philly.   Zack Jackson 1:05:43 Well just wait a few years when hitch bought the white comes up and saves us all from the evil forces having battled the Balrog of Philadelphia   Rachael Jackson 1:05:57 to be controlled   Zack Jackson 1:05:58 to niche all right next time

Episode 80 One year ago, way back in episode 30, Dr Daniel Janies spoke with us about the emerging SARS-CoV-2 virus and the resultant COVID-19 infections which were quickly spreading around the world. Now, as multiple vaccines are rolling out across the world and dangerous variants are nipping at their heels, we wanted to invite Dr Janies back to the show to talk about about the state of the pandemic, what to expect next, and what we can do to get back to normal. Should we be worried about the new variants? Are there other similar viruses waiting in the wings? What's so special about these vaccines? Will we ever beat COVID or is this just the new normal? Let's talk about it.    ---------------- Dr Daniel Janies is an American scientist who has made significant contributions in the field of evolutionary biology and on the development of tools for the study of evolution and spread of pathogens. He is The Carol Grotnes Belk Distinguished Professor of Bioinformatics and Genomics at University of North Carolina at Charlotte. He is involved with research for the United States Department of Defense, and has advised multiple instances of the government on methods for disease surveillance. -------------------------   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    Transcript  This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.    Zack Jackson 00:04 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are   Kendra Holt-Moore 00:15 Kendra Holt-Moore, PhD candidate at Boston University. And if I could be a scientist, I would be a quantum scientist   Rachael Jackson 00:25 Rachael Jackson, Rabbi at Agoudas, Israel congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina. And if I were a scientist, I would choose to be a geneticist.   Zack Jackson 00:39 Zack Jackson UCC pastor in Reading, Pennsylvania, and for most of my life, I wanted to be an astrophysicist. So, we're gonna go with that one.   Ian Binns 00:49 Ian Binns Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte. And I could pick any science professional I probably would have been a paleontologist. Yeah, like dinosaurs. Okay, so today. In 2012, today's guest joined the University of North Carolina at Charlotte as the Carol gruffness. Belk distinguished professor of bioinformatics and genomics. He originated the field of mapping pathogen genetic data, in concert with geography and host animals. He was a tenured faculty member in the College of Medicine at The Ohio State University, where he served as national principal investigator in the Tree of Life program of NSF. He's advised the Obama White House depending on and testified to both houses of Congress. I'm very pleased to welcome back to our show, Dr. Dan Janis. So welcome back.   Dan Janies 01:42 Thanks very much.   Zack Jackson 01:44 Welcome back, Dan.   Ian Binns 01:45 I'm really proud of that.   Zack Jackson 01:49 Wherever very proud of you to be and Thanks, guys. Well, thanks for coming back, Dan.   Dan Janies 01:56 Oh, my pleasure.   Zack Jackson 01:57 The last time you were on, for those who are not longtime listeners was March 18 2020. Way back in Episode 30. Back at the beginning of this newfangled pandemic, where I don't even know if we were using that word quite yet. No one really knew in the public really what was going on. I feel like that was at the time when we were just talking about like two weeks of lockdown, to contain this to flatten the curve so that we can get back to normal. President Trump was talking about going back to church on Easter, which have, I am a pastor who just went back to in person church on Easter, he just got the wrong year. It took a couple extra months to get there. And a lot of what you said in that episode of sounded extraordinary at the time, but now seems commonplace. I remember asking you if What if this virus becomes airborne, and you said, Oh, it is airborne. I'm like, wait, what it is. And then sure enough, now, everyone basically agrees that it is airborne. We were debating back then about where it came from. And you said all those other things, those are just red herrings, it came from bats. And there we go. Now we know, you would predict that it was gonna we were still going to be talking about this in a year. And here we are a year later talking about it. So we're really happy to have you back on to help untangle a lot of where we are today. The state of things and what's coming up next. Well, great,   Dan Janies 03:38 great. Yeah, there's certainly been a number of chapters.   Zack Jackson 03:44 No kidding. This probably isn't how you imagined your 2020 was going to go when it started?   Dan Janies 03:51 Well, it there's something about it. I I've been through a few of these. And this one from the beginning felt very different. Just a matter of getting that through our heads. And it came through our heads at different periods of time, I think.   Ian Binns 04:05 Can we expand on that what you saw like this one?   Dan Janies 04:08 Look at 2009 h one n one, we all still traveled when I wasn't allowed to say stay home from work, communications people were worked with when they thought the business community wouldn't like it. And so we had to say, cover your call. That's about all we could say. And I went to China in 2009, you know? Oh, yeah.   Ian Binns 04:32 I think you also said in the last time we had you on the use of the word quarantine, that people were very careful in the use of that word as well.   Dan Janies 04:42 Yeah, we couldn't say that and they weren't going to close the schools. So we couldn't say social distance either. That was so euphemism if we were gonna say something, but yeah,   Ian Binns 04:53 yeah. So and now like the cats out of the bag. I mean, we use those phrases all the time. Now.   Dan Janies 05:00 Yes, yes, this one turned out very different. Do you   Rachael Jackson 05:02 feel a little bit like a prophet?   Dan Janies 05:05 No, um, it's easy to be wrong here too. I mean, some of us even talked about being guilty about not being noisier. You know what I mean? So I did testify to Congress. So I don't know how.   Zack Jackson 05:25 In many ways you do sound a lot like the Hebrew prophets.   Dan Janies 05:28 Yeah. So.   Zack Jackson 05:31 So this the state of things, as you see them right now, where would you place us now compared to last year,   Dan Janies 05:38 I think vaccines and the rate at which we produce them and their efficacy is a is a, just a triumph. I mean, that, that it has been amazing. And anybody who doubts, our ability to, you know, work together and come up with solutions and multiple solutions, in case one didn't work, should, you know, not have much to argue about anymore? It's just been tremendous. And now the rollout is, is it's been a challenge. But in the United States, we're doing a pretty good job, you know, remains a challenge. But we're doing better than other parts of the world. And there are parts of the world like Israel, they're doing better than us. So all this is work.   Kendra Holt-Moore 06:25 I was reading something. Maybe yesterday or a couple days ago, that was just an article about was the phrase, something like hygiene, performed no hygiene theater, that's what it was. And that, like, what we know now about transmission being airborne, and that surfaces are not really that they don't play as much of a role as we thought they did a year ago, but that people continue to, like clean, like non stop surfaces, and that it, like, makes people feel good, but it's actually just this like hygiene theater like performativity. Um, it seems like, I don't know, it might just be where I am currently. But it seems like that's gonna be something kind of hard to let go of, because it is good to like, wash your hands and stuff like that. But yeah, how? I'm just curious. And this isn't just just have to be for Dan. But it is like mostly to that, Dan, I guess, like, how are we going to stop, like wasting money on cleaning protocols that we don't have to do? Is it a good idea to stop all of that? Is there something valuable in signaling? cleanliness is to me, it seems a little bit shallow, I guess. But I understand that there could be value in it. Like what what do you predict for the coming months? And like the next year?   Dan Janies 07:56 Yeah, well, you're doing you're doing a lot, you're just not stopping SARS, COVID to transmission with cleaning surfaces, scoby to the vast majority of it has been covered is airborne, transmission, respiratory droplets. But there are pathogens that are transferred on surfaces, bacterial pathogens, and so forth. So you know, like food hygiene is largely dependent on surface contamination, and so forth. So water contamination, so that's that you're gonna have better food hygiene, which is always a good thing. Yeah.   Kendra Holt-Moore 08:26 Yeah. No, that that, that makes sense. But like, all the extra stuff, you know, like wiping down the like, desks or whatever, like, I guess there's value in that, like, kids maybe won't get us sick with other things. But I guess, part of what was interesting to me about that was that there's been so much money, especially when you're looking at different, like, public schools, or just other organizations that could be putting all that money into, like, air filters and stuff like that. But they're spending so much money on cleaning supplies, and there is like, obviously, you know, like what you're saying it that does help for a lot of other things. But it's just like, where do we like, find the balance of actually, if the priority right now is COVID? It makes sense to do more of the airborne precautions, but what about like, five years from now?   Dan Janies 09:19 Because, yeah, well, I think that's a great question. And it's probably matter is going to, like mass will probably become a matter of personal preference going forward. And schools are regulated. So that won't be preferred personal preference, but, you know, probably be, you know, find some reasonable balance going forward. But once we, you know, we're humans once we started doing something, it's, it's hard to reverse course, right. So, right, that human nature thing.   Rachael Jackson 09:43 Is there such a thing do you think, as too much usage of these things?   Dan Janies 09:49 I have not heard of that. But, uh, you know, if it's like anything if it's preoccupying you so you don't do other things or you're burning yourself. You know, like there are people wash their hands too much and not wreck their skin. And I think those things are.   Rachael Jackson 10:02 Right. Right, this idea of antibacterial right, that we're using all bacterial wipes for everything. Oh, are we just making stronger bugs?   Dan Janies 10:11 Yeah, I don't know, of any particular expertise on that, that. I think these, you know, antibacterial products certainly do provide some of the selective force that that I think that's demonstrated at the look of the paper that is driving antimicrobial resistance, but I'm just using intuition here, as probably nothing compared to overuse of antibiotics, which, you know, we use in our own bodies, and we use wantedly in agriculture, and that's just the concentrations being used in those settings is tremendous. So I think we got whoops, we'll come back to that, so much caring about over cleaning, but hopefully caring about other problems. And to shift gears a little bit here. Think of, you know, antibiotic resistance was was the, you know, the crisis that we've forgotten about cancer screenings haven't been done, you know, people haven't gotten their teeth cleaned. And so there's all this neglected maintenance and and refocusing we're gonna have to do.   Ian Binns 11:14 So what do you think of like, you were being that we kind of talked a little about, like classroom spaces and things like that. You remember back last spring, so a year ago, in conversations about what could the fall look like at so at our university, Danny and see Charlotte and like, even in lab spaces, or classroom spaces, you know, many classrooms may have, you know, access to like a, you know, a staplers or whatever that students could pass around or anything like that, that could be communal supplies. there was all this talk of well, we couldn't have that, you know, the concerns around we can't have communal supplies in your classrooms and stuff like that. Do you think, is that still a concern? I mean, because you know, our university is going to be back primarily face to face in the fall, most universities probably will be most schools are going that route as well. I mean, is that something that you think that teachers will have to clean the desk spaces and stuff like that in between classes and things like that? Yeah.   Dan Janies 12:08 I'll have some thoughts around. But, you know, bear in mind, like, I'm not authorized to speak about University operations by any means, right? I'm just these are just generic thoughts. I think we can be reasonable about it. I think people are gonna like, you know, more personal space, and having their own things. And I'd like to work in a clean environment. You know, I don't I bet the cases of SARS covi transcript Trent transfers based on shared staplers are almost non though, let's put it that right.   Rachael Jackson 12:43 So I wanted to go back to this vaccine question a little bit, if you may, may seem very, very optimistic, which I think is wonderful. Recognizing that, as a whole, our country is doing well. Right? On in some places, adequate, some places, some populations very poor. But as taken as a whole, we're doing well, right. Our my social commentary is that there's certainly issues in with racial justice surrounding that. But if we take the country as a whole, we're certainly doing better than than others, and certainly doing better than what we were doing. So when we look at vaccines, one of the things that we're facing now, and I was listening to an NPR story about this, was saying that very soon, we're going to have a surplus. But we're still not at a place where we're reaching this generalized herd immunity, whether or not that herd immunity is 75%, or 85%, or even 90%. We know that it's above 70. Like comfortably, we know that above 70, is where we need to go. And we're at 25%, looking at this question of having a surplus. And for me, part of what when I look at that part of the rash, the reason for that is are disparities in terms of equity. But then there's also a question of, there's a lot of people that just aren't going to take it. And what do you think as a scientist that we can do to encourage getting to that place? Well,   Dan Janies 14:31 I think several things and I think it's gonna be patchy. And that's the problem with with the herd immunity question is, surpluses are occurring in in some states already, because they've just exhausted the number of people willing to take the vaccine. They think, you know, with the let's just be honest with any medical intervention, there's a small risk of an adverse reaction. Some people have a psychology Do against needles, some people over psychology against distrust in medicine, and those are all things we're gonna have to work on. I think though the recent news about Johnson Johnson and more, most Previous to that asked her Astra Zeneca, vaccines, causing blood clots, is definitely concerning and will be followed up on by the full force of regulatory agencies. But bear in mind, your chances of having an adverse outcome to SARS COVID to infection are about 125 times more than having an adverse reaction to a vaccine. It's terrible for those people had those reactions, but it's something like six and six individuals and 7 million, you know, so it's terrible for all those people, and we got to do better. But you know, people don't have these emotional reactions to vaccine and medicine don't respond to those numbers. Right. So I just think it's a hard question. And I think it's a question of science literacy just for many things. And this speaks to the misinformation to which finds opportunity and in these, you know, in these areas where the vaccines have slightly failed, or where there's mistrust sewn already, I just think what we should just keep doing what we're doing in terms of nature of science, instruction sciences, and perfect vaccines aren't perfect, but they're better than nothing and way better than these ones are wildly good. Stars Coronavirus. Two vaccines are 90% effective, whereas we lived happily with influenza vaccines, you know, 3040 50% effective, you know, so if you're going out in the rain, take a raincoat, you know, it's like, to me, it's common sense, you   Zack Jackson 16:47 know, so that why is the are they recommending the vaccine the Johnson and Johnson vaccine be put on hold? When it seems like it seems safer than any of the the the medications you see advertised on TV with their litany of side effects afterwards? is just for PR and public confidence, or is that actually concerning? Well, it's,   Dan Janies 17:13 you know, all these, those ads don't have those disclaimers because they like them that's regulated, right. So the major concern is, of course, for all those individuals that are infected but there as if effected by an adverse reaction. But the erosion of public trust by a small event is worse in terms of continuing to give the virus new hosts by all the people who can't or because they're not eligible or because of underlying conditions or because they just have a emotional or psychological problem with taking a vaccine. And this speaks back to the herd immunity question and nobody can really calculate what that is and but that the best estimate, I heard of the best sort of way to explain it is 60%. Sounds good because if the are not the transmission rate of the virus is three and that that number is varied. That means for every person affected, you're affecting three others. If we immunize two of those potential new infections, we're taking them off the playing field off the table for SARS Coronavirus, two leaving only one so are not going to one. So every person infected only infects one more person. The virus spread is not growing. It's that sort of a steady state then and that. That doesn't sound great. I mean, I think Coronavirus is going to be with us like like influences with us. We've just will payment down to that low level transmission. But there always be new hosts. There's always going to be children. And hopefully we get the vaccines approved for children. But there's always newborns and there's always people who won't take it. And there's always the virus continuing to evolve which we've seen in influenza for decades.   Zack Jackson 19:03 So you think we are solidly on the path to this being a seasonal thing and not being eradicated? Like MERS   Dan Janies 19:11 Yeah, I I think early hope in some of the uncertainty around SARS COVID. To You know, this notion that it was different but we couldn't explain why was tied to MERS going first didn't really go extinct though. SARS, SARS one, but I mean SARS covi. did go extinct MERS. There were cases until 2018. People think of Huawei in 2015. But there were still cases until 2018. So MERS might be clinking around out there. But this Yeah. tsarskoe v2 is clearly different. I don't it didn't show any seasonality early in our behaviors drove drove more the transmission of the virus and our lack of vaccines or lack of any defense against it. And so we think of fluid seasonal, it may show some seasonality tsarskoe v2, but think of influenza h one n one that actually emerged in April where we're supposed to be coming out of flu season so.   Ian Binns 20:06 So with you said SARS COVID. One did go extinct, right?   Dan Janies 20:12 That lineage went extinct. This is the most important thing that   Ian Binns 20:15 won't happen.   Dan Janies 20:17 It emerged from bats. And   Ian Binns 20:19 I mean, why did that go extinct? That we have things against it? No,   Dan Janies 20:23 that's a great question. So I thought I ran out of hosts in the countries. We didn't experience it so much in the US, we don't think about it, but just good infection control. It was transmitting a lot between patient and healthcare workers. And in Toronto, for example, and they just they stopped, they were able to stomp it out. In Beijing, there was, you know, panic in the streets. I mean, there was nobody in the streets, so just shut down Beijing. And so early rent responses, I think, muted it quickly. But the point is, from an evolutionary perspective, all the cousins of stars go v1, one of which was MERS, one of which was SARS, go v2, there's probably I don't know the number, but there are multiples of these things clinking around in bats all the time. And what happened with tsarskoe v2 is one emerged that can that turned out to be incredibly transmissible and very well adapted to, to humans or human transmission, it continues to adapt through variants. Right. And that was a game changer. And well, you know, we're worried about source code v3 source code before, and anything else. I mean, we've not even paid attention to the rest of the, you know, virus fear for a long time. So that's what we got to start doing.   Rachael Jackson 21:37 Do you think that so you're you're indicating that this, this family lineage, SARS, and MERS, and SARS, COVID to originated from bats, and the second one has also the one that we're mo focuses focusing on SARS, COVID. Two came from bats and the back to human transmission. Do you think that there's my my question is twofold. Do you think that there are other completely different family lines that has nothing to do with us, rs covi that are coming from bats. And second part of that is, are there other animals that we also need to be thinking about that could have this potential transmission that were just that we haven't really focused on?   Dan Janies 22:28 Yeah, great question. So certainly, bats are the most important host for these severe medically important coronaviruses SARS MERS COVID. However, rodents have been the source of other coronaviruses animal to human transmission events have been recorded in the literature since the 60s. And they've been recorded in genomes since you know, the I would say, right after SARS, we started a sequence when I was at Ohio State that a lot of us agriculturally important coronaviruses. In fact, a lot of them do come from cows and in their cousins, camels since case immerse those coronaviruses In fact, in fact, people but they cause something, I can do a common cold. And so there was never a lot of medical concern about them. So   Rachael Jackson 23:21 medically, who cares?   Dan Janies 23:22 Yeah, yeah, it's a cold, you know, we call it a cold, or we call it influenza like illness that one of the soap boxes, I like to get honest, we don't really know what causes those things. They're one of 30 potential things could be a rhinovirus could be bacteria sometimes, and we never really diagnose the pathogen itself, like we have begun to do with source code to, to delineate it from influenza and so forth. I think that sort of personalized attack on the bug itself, rather than the symptoms is going to be wildly important now. And then we'll know more what oh, a backtrack to the animal sources of these things. So that's a great question and opens up an area of science I've been hoping to open up for a long time.   Rachael Jackson 24:06 How is Sorry, just sort of putting on this this other question? How is this for those that aren't super? well read myself included? In terms of what is the difference of I'll just use the bat, as example, right? Drag to human transmission, as opposed to some of these other diseases that we see as carriers, for example, malaria, in mosquitoes, or you used you said rodents and I, that immediately got me thinking, you know, the Black Death or the black plague is centuries ago, which was brought in by rodents, but it wasn't from rodents. It was, you know, the bugs on them. And then it got to us like what is how you talk to me like I'm five in terms of what does it mean to actually have this transmission to cross that barrier? And how is that different than these others? Sort of insect driven issues,   Dan Janies 25:03 it all matters, it's it comes down to the nature of the biology. So pathogens are just they're all just hitching a ride, right? So the bats are good at flying these things around and the bad immune system and this is a whole nother area to seems to be able to fight them off or run so hot, so to speak, that they don't get infected or, and I think they've even reduced their immune repertoire. So they're, they're just flying around happy with full of viruses. It's true. There's NEPA, Andra, don't handle that. Whatever you do. of cool. Yeah, yeah. Cool. Yeah. Oh, it's biology. Don't go to lunch with biologists either. So, so that, you know, the back question is probably people going into caves and collecting guano, I guess it's valuable, maybe eating them. I've heard of bad consumption on around the world. And then let's switch to, you know, insect borne diseases, mosquitoes are worse than bats, right, they cause more death and destruction. And you know, now almost anything on earth in terms of malaria, and flaviviruses, Zika, and dengue and so forth. And the mosquito, the female mosquito essentially bites your friend, then take some of their blood, and your furry friend has the malaria parasite called Plasmodium in it, it's the genus Plasmodium, it's a, it's a little thing called an EP complexin parasite, then the, that female mosquito goes on to you, and bites you, and then injects that Plasmodium into you. And then you get malaria. Right. And in terms of bacterial pathogens, like plague, you know, living close to the rats, and I suppose, you know, historically, rats were getting into food stores, grain and so forth. And people were eating that, and getting infected. And then once it gets into people, you're handling the body and so forth. And all that goes back to all these hygiene issues. Bacteria are terrible, too.   Rachael Jackson 27:10 So we should really, you know, I know, this is not what you're saying. But, you know, part of one of the things that I could hear you saying is be vegan, and wear a mosquito suit all the time. Like, like, like if we want to protect ourselves from these things like that's,   Dan Janies 27:28 yeah. Oh, well. What's interesting about Malaria is we had it in the United States, we had yellow fever in the United States. And so we don't have to be personally hypersensitive or hyper sensitive to what's around us if we do reasonable public health, like control standing water, have screens, our windows, things like simple things like that, that lead to mosquito control. And, you know, this,   Rachael Jackson 27:57 they're the most horrible things. I I am a, you know, from a religious standpoint, and from a you know, perhaps a standpoint of you know, I believe that things have a place and there's Domino effects when you when there's extinctions, you know, we don't fully know understand the ramifications of things but I think the world would be better without mosquitoes. I'm just, I, I see only positives from that. I see nothing good from the mosquito. And I   Zack Jackson 28:32 how will we you know, Jurassic Park without mosquito I don't care.   Ian Binns 28:38 mean, I can become a paleontologist so   Rachael Jackson 28:40 much and I'm, yeah,   Zack Jackson 28:42 that's right. You just be a biologist at that point.   Rachael Jackson 28:44 And I'm one of those people that doesn't get like a cute little mosquito bite, you know, like, oh, it itches. It's like it becomes a welts and it just like my whole like, is awful. So is there any purpose to mosquitoes that that you could shed light on? No, you people have brought   Dan Janies 29:01 up what you have is you know, why don't we just extinct them? Yeah, there there are ways to do it. I don't think we'd be successful mosquitoes   Zack Jackson 29:10 were very good at exterior Yeah.   Dan Janies 29:13 We're going to extinct something Yeah. But But the people would argue that you're taking away the food source for other other organisms like our friends in the bats. Also our friends the fish. Oh, can't   Rachael Jackson 29:26 we just make more flies then?   Dan Janies 29:33 Yeah, yeah. I'm one would, one would say look at Australia, every animal transportation or eradication attempt is calling right.   Zack Jackson 29:49 So I want to ask a question about the the variance I keep hearing if you and a question born out of ignorance because I keep hearing these acronyms thrown around and these different variants of places from the UK from South Africa from Brazil, there was that one in what the Netherlands that was coming through mink. And we were all worried about that one. And I, I hear people saying, Oh, don't worry, the vaccines still seems to be fairly effective against it. But here in Pennsylvania, we have one of the highest, the highest rates of transmission right now. We are, I think, in the top three worst states right now for new cases, which is super exciting. Can you shed some light on the, on some of these variants on the development of them? What do you have your eye on? in particular?   Dan Janies 30:47 Yeah, sure. So when we had those, you know, spikes. In late 2020, early 2021, there were a lot of cases, and every time the virus is replicating itself, it will make mistakes, right, and a lot of those mistakes and mutations will produce viral lineages that are not as successful in transmitting themselves as their, you know, their cousins. But some well, and so UK variant, not only was different by, by by 15 mutations, but also started to become predominant in the UK. And those are the two kind of Harbinger's are indicators of a successful variant. Right. And what's interesting about the UK variant, though, is the vaccines are still pretty effective against it. It's the South Africa variant, which shares some of the same mutations as the UK variant, and especially the Brazilian variant that shows some ability to not be neutralized by the first by the antibodies produced in your body by the first versions of the vaccines. Okay. However, remember, these vaccines were 90% effective against what we call the wild type, the original source COVID. So they had some ground to give, and they're still certainly effective. The number of breakthrough cases were people who were beyond two weeks since their second Pfizer materna shot for example. I think in the United States, something like 5000 total, people have been infected. But that's a very small number against, you know, 40,000 in you know, successful injections, right. So they do occur. Nobody ever said these vaccines were perfect. They're slightly less perfect against variants. But we do have to be vigilant. I mean, there are stories out of Brazil that they thought not vaccination, because they've had a terrible rollout. But in the city of Manassas in the Amazon, they thought that they had herd immunity just because 60% of the people have had Coronavirus, just because of transmission. And the variant emerged. And you know, it's not going away. This is just SARS Coronavirus, two in evolution doing its job. And all those people got reinfected by the Brazilian variants. So there was Yeah, so it's just been ravaging in Brazil. And we don't want that here. And I'm not surprised the UK variant got around the border was open, you could fly to London and back, especially post Brexit, right? The interesting thing here is to where there are a few cases of Brazilian variant, but they've been all travel cases and stopped. In South Africa variant, they see it occurs here in South Carolina. In other states, I looked at the original data, and it's not very good. So I'm worried and vigilant.   Rachael Jackson 33:46 And what does that mean? I'm sorry, what is what is not very good mean?   Dan Janies 33:49 They sequence the virus, and it was an incomplete sequence. And some of the mutations were not characterized. They had Say, say these things are characterized on 15 mutations, they and eight of them that they called it is good enough. So   Rachael Jackson 34:04 okay, so so it's not it's not that, Oh, no, the data is showing bad. It's saying the data was bad, the data was complete.   Dan Janies 34:12 So I, you know, I'll take that back tomorrow, if the if more data comes out, and it's all good. But these things going to other, there's also domestic variants occurring too. There's a variant thing called a California variant, there was a Ohio or Midwest variant. And we're watching all of those vaccines vaccine seemed to continue to work against those even though they're transmitting a lot. So our domestic variants are not quite as worrisome as these originally foreign variants in all these things have overlap. So to call them a, you know, a unique entity is is is a little bit strange. They're they're nested sets of mutations, so to speak.   Kendra Holt-Moore 34:56 I just wanted to follow up and ask Do we know Why the vaccines work against some of the variants and not others? Is that still just like totally mysterious to us? Or is there something that people are finding like this is why it's sort of effective.   Dan Janies 35:19 The key part of the spike protein that binds to yourself called the receptor binding domain. Those are sort of the business end of the virus, and the antibodies produced by the original vaccine against those are not as effective as against the new variants who have modified that receptor binding domain. So they're, they're those new variants are modifying their business and to get into your cells, even though you've been vaccinated.   Kendra Holt-Moore 35:54 Okay, that makes sense. So it's just that some mutations are like closer, they're in the   Zack Jackson 35:59 right spot   Kendra Holt-Moore 36:01 than others.   Dan Janies 36:02 Yeah. And they're in the right spot, they've hit on Yeah. There's, there's one called e 44k, which seems to open up a lot of infectious territory for the virus, then there's one called en 501, y that does the same. And in some of these things have to happen in sets, like, one has changed to compensate for the loss of fitness, or the virus might work a little bad if it only had that one. But if it has to works even better, so it's a it's a complicated choreography that the virus does through evolution.   Kendra Holt-Moore 36:41 Yeah, that makes sense. And then I guess, one more follow up, cuz I know, Rachel has question is, you know, if, if some of these variants are so different that the vaccines we have now aren't really doing it? Like, do you think that in the future, we will be able to formulate a vaccine that can cover all variants? Or are we going to end up with like multiple vaccines to cover different kinds of variants? And it'll just be like, extra shots every year?   Dan Janies 37:13 Yeah, there's a couple of questions there. So one is the first thing is the vaccines are good. They remain good and effective against most variants. The most important thing is even if you're reinfected, you have some immune protection. And the people who are reinfected the small fraction, they're reinfected are not going into the intensive care and are not dying. And so you may have a mild experience, rather than just being immune, I mean, immunologically naive, being re infected post inoculation, but you're not gonna die, right? I mean, you're not going to go to the hospital, we, so that that's the most important thing. And that's, that's the key message. So it's not game over with a variant. Yeah. But it's an ongoing game, right? And an ongoing struggle. And there's a couple of things going on, if we want to roll out, there's a window of opportunity to roll out more and more vaccinations before the virus continues to vary in a way that we can't combat. And then also back to the lab, right. studies are being done to reprint the vaccine, these vaccines are, especially the MMR and a vaccines, they're amazing. You basically just specify what kind of protein you're through what kind of mRNA you want to make, which is the instructions for your body to make the protein free reanna your antibodies to respond to. So they can just say, okay, we see you variant, we're printing you out, and we're going to put that in people now. You know. So that that's, that's just tremendous. I mean, we are, we are incrementally winning this arms race. If we do all things, right, if we prepare, and we do all our due diligence, and people listen.   Rachael Jackson 39:06 You can hear all of our cynicism, and that laugh.   Dan Janies 39:09 Yeah.   Kendra Holt-Moore 39:11 It is really cool, though. And like really, you know, we   Dan Janies 39:13 are much better prepared than we were six months ago. It's amazing. And now, I mean, I'll, I'll go on for just a minute more. There's talk of preparing mRNA technologies against cancer, preparing mRNA technologies against all kinds of other infectious agents. So this, although as terrible as this was the technological spin off, could be tremendous. And, you know, vaccines and infectious disease were, were not a well funded enterprise for a long time. And now we've learned our lesson the hard way it was in the 70s. I think the, you know, least the American Medical enterprise said, you know, cancer is where it's at, and we think and Excess diseases pretty much whipped. And that's completely not true.   Ian Binns 40:04 So is it because of the mRNA technology? Is that what makes the these vaccines so effective? I mean, you talked about like, even Historically, the level the percentage, what 90 to 95% effective is just mind boggling compared to historically with vaccines, Is it because of that technology? Well,   Dan Janies 40:26 bear in mind the the dino virus, which is also a relatively newly employed technology to were also very effective. So much of, you know, Johnson Johnson was one shot at 76%, I think we had the advantage of, at the time fighting one variant, whereas with influenza, there's multiple circulating variants all the time, it's been around, you know, for a long time, where's this source code to was newly emergent, it looked like one thing at the time, the decisions were being made. Whereas influenza is basically a committee decision. And if, nowadays, we we design a vaccine against four of them. And it's a lot of guesswork, but this was not guesswork. We, you know, the MRIs were printed against the stars COVID, two that came out of Wuhan. And so, so now they're gonna have to print them against the one coming out of South Africa, the one coming out of   Zack Jackson 41:22 Britain, I should point out for those at home, who are not super familiar with the way that vaccines have worked, and you can feel free to correct me, because I'm sure I'll be wrong. But the way that flu vaccines have worked is, you know, basically you they try to figure out ahead of time, which ones are going to be the dominant strains, and they have to isolate those strains, and then breed those strains in isolation and breed a variant that is less deadly, and then kill it, and then put it into egg whites. Yes, right. And like, that whole process takes months and months and months and tons of eggs for some reason it I think people still don't realize how, in some ways primitive the technology is, whereas the mRNA vaccine contains the the information for your body to do the creating of the thing that it wants to have resistance against. And so we have the information about the spike protein at the end, we tell your arm muscle, make that spike spike protein, your immune system goes, What is this mess? We need to kill this and sleep and then a couple of weeks later, it's like it's back again. All right, now we really need to remember this. And then whenever it sees the spike protein, chillin on a Coronavirus. It goes and eats it up. Yeah. And there's no eggs that have to be used.   Dan Janies 42:53 Excellent. With it, the one caveat that cell cultures now use for a lot of influenza vaccine production. So but i would i would bet money that, you know, we see I'm already vaccines for from influenza, in the near future to and other other viruses. So,   Rachael Jackson 43:15 you know, from a genetic standpoint, is there I am really trying to understand why this technology took until now to be used. Right? There's there's I think there's sort of maybe, maybe a general misconception in the overall populace that you know, this mRNA it's brand new, and we've we've never seen it before. And it's it's this newfangled thing when it's, there's this woman, Caitlin carico. And I might be mispronouncing her name, I have only read it, but she's been doing this for 30 years. So what, why not just a why now, but why not? Then? Like, what what has changed in the genetics fields? What has changed in epidemiology that has said, Sure, let's try it now.   Dan Janies 44:10 I think the crisis, and you know, the business model wasn't there before and the crisis drove for there be a business model for a rapidly developed vaccine that was tunable. And we put enough money into it that we didn't bank on just one technology. So nobody, nobody said it's mRNA or nothing. They they also did a dino virus technology. And yeah,   Rachael Jackson 44:34 what have we done this 2030 years ago? Like, what if because you're saying one of the statements you just made was that there's a potential now that we've seen the efficacy and that we've poured money into it that we might transition from the influenza vaccine that we all know and love and hate. And take a button that went out there to this completely new way of understanding it? Why wouldn't we have done that 20 years ago.   Dan Janies 45:02 conservatism, I mean, getting getting things approved is is hard. You know, vaccines are, you know, I'm not an expert in this field. But I understand that it's not a great business does take a lot of government influence and incentives. There's this agency called BARDA, VA, er, da, that that their role is to protect the country by making government investments in pharmaceutical development such that we are prepared for this. And I imagine agencies like that will become ever more important than how we run the country.   Ian Binns 45:36 So can I ask you something, just for clarification with the fact that we are at the very beginning of this when we realize we need to develop and produce and distribute vaccines to beat this thing? Where the idea is already there? Well, before this of mRNA technology is the way we should go in the future? Or was this a we need all hands on deck, whatever technology you have you better to use it?   Dan Janies 46:01 Yeah, the ladder in this case, but this was, you know, hopefully 100 year flood. All these technologies existed on paper, or, or even in the case of adenovirus vector technology. It was used in the gene therapy field, and there was a death of a patient. And so it got taken off the shelf. Because then that was recently resurrected. And in terms of vaccines.   Ian Binns 46:29 Okay, but mRNA technology? I'm sorry, you may have said earlier, what else is was it used for prior to this? Because obviously, it's existed, but for medical treatments, is it been used for other things,   Dan Janies 46:41 I'm not aware of any, I could be wrong about that. But we use it every day to make you need to transcribe our DNA and the proteins   Zack Jackson 46:50 you're doing right now. So   Rachael Jackson 46:55 what we've sort of had sort of a roundtable q&a today, which I really appreciate that you've been able to be here for Daniel and allowed us to have this. We're limited by what we know. So are there things that you want to tell us and all those listening, things that we just didn't even know to ask?   Dan Janies 47:19 Yeah, um, please, you know, seek a vaccine, if you're able, and you're your physician, you know, the real regulate Shin allows you to, you're taking taking advantage of tremendous technology that's not going to only, you know, make your health better, but everybody around you, that's what's amazing, though, no vaccines. So I would like to see this starting to be part of in part of good citizenship. And something that we touched upon in prep that we haven't really gotten to is the threat of misinformation. So I think also, it's a matter of good citizenship, not to Ford wonky things, you know, he is free country, you can say whatever you want, but, you know, don't I would like people to care about their reputations online, and then maybe try to check multiple sources and or ask questions and, and not only we having this done to us by foreign adversaries who, for whatever reason, want to slow down our rollout or want to diminish the quality of our vaccine, or the perceived quality of our vaccine so they can sell theirs. We're doing the starting to do it to ourselves with shame. So we're starting to misinformed ourselves for whatever reason,   Ian Binns 48:37 what have been some of your biggest surprises. I know you talked about this a little bit earlier, but over the past year, like things have just really surprised you about your field scientific community in general. The public I mean, just Yes,   Dan Janies 48:54 I would say three things. How big search COBie two was, versus its predecessors, MERS and SARS GAVI to our lack of ability to see what was happening, and we saw it in China, and we didn't believe it. China and Italy, in not take it seriously. That American arrogance, or however you want to put it, which I hated to say wouldn't have said it in 2019. But the fact that this wasn't going to happen to us was just surprising. And then, how bad it was and how we thought we and how we couldn't hold the fort, right? We thought we were through this and people are impatient and they relax their behaviors. And now that we've been having that vaccines, people don't want to accept them and we have this window of opportunity. Now a real window of opportunity. That's not not even you know, terrible. You're not in here vaccine, you can see your grandkids you can you know, you can circulate you can Do all the fun things you want. It's and people are not accepting it. And so all this is a, it's gonna be an ongoing struggle, I   Zack Jackson 50:07 think on multiple fronts. What's your most optimistic projection for what 2021 will look like for the world?   Dan Janies 50:16 I think it's gonna matter every year, it's gonna be patchy, you know, I think your IRA economy's already recovering, I think through tremendous stimulus, I don't know how long that's gonna last. So I'm digressing into a different field here, but but we have the, you know, we have the tools to get out of this thing, we just need to bear down and use them, their place in the world where it's gonna be bad for a long time. And Brazil has a terrible rollout. You know, these places that bought vaccines from China and Russia, may get them may not get them. You know, they may work fine, but they can't produce in the numbers that need to be produced. You know, we we definitely could roll out some of our surplus once we get to that point to to other countries, and we shall, but that's gonna, that's going to take time. So I think we're going to be okay. I think there's going to be pockets of the world that are not going to be okay. For a very long time.   Ian Binns 51:13 Didn't how does that play in for us?   Dan Janies 51:15 Don't Don't count on traveling up. Yeah, enjoy go to the Grand Canyon or something. You're not going to you're not going to Asia? Or or you're not going to the Olympics. You're not going to Europe anytime soon. You can't   Ian Binns 51:30 feel like the impact of international travel. Yeah, it's gonna last for a long time.   51:36 Yeah. Like,   Ian Binns 51:36 I just feel like it's potential for that for several years. Yeah.   Zack Jackson 51:41 But I can go to a Phillies game this summer. Sure. If you want it. Yeah,   Dan Janies 51:50 I think we'll get back to normal domestic activities, including school in the fall,   Zack Jackson 51:56 including drunken karaoke and a smoky bar.   Dan Janies 52:00 Just don't, I said this podcast. I think individually packaged peanuts are going to be   Zack Jackson 52:12 Oh, you should already see the variety and individually packaged communion kits. Yeah, they have just in the past year exploded in variety, and flavors and shapes and sizes. And we're all about that individual packaging now. Thank you again, thanks for taking time to, to spend with us to answer our questions to help illuminate some of our pockets of ignorance. I hope that things will really rolled out as as well as you. You make them seem at least here. You are not very optimistic for the rest of the world. But I hope you're wrong about that. So I doubt you are you've been right about everything so far.   Dan Janies 53:04 Well, thanks for having me. It's really important work that you're doing. So thanks very much.   Ian Binns 53:08 Thank you

Episode 79 In part 12 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr Elizabeth Fernandez. She is an astrophysicist, science communicator, and host of the SparkDialog podcast. Her podcast is on science and society, and tells the story of science in our lives, and the connection of science with things like religion, philosophy, history, culture, ethics, art, and the future. If you enjoy Down the Wormhole, you will definitely love SparkDialog. Check it out at www.sparkdialog.com or wherever you get your podcasts.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    Transcript  This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.    Zack Jackson 00:05 You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week we are exploring how that relationship gets worked out in real life with one of the current Sinai and Synapses, fellows, Sinai and Synapses is a two year fellowship committed to elevating the discourse surrounding religion and science and where the five of us first met. So without further ado, our guest today is an astrophysicist, science communicator and host of The Spark dialogue podcast. Her podcast is on science and society and tells the story of science in our lives and the connection of science with things like religion, philosophy, history, culture, ethics, art in the future, if you enjoy down the wormhole, and if you're listening, I hope you do. You will definitely love spark dialogue. So welcome to the podcast. Elizabeth Fernandez. Thank you very much. It's wonderful to have you here. We've been talking about both having you here for an interview and also doing crossover episodes for what feels like yours. So it's good to finally get to chat with you. It's also good to have a fellow science podcaster on the podcast. So maybe we could start out by telling the good folks at home a little bit about what spark dialogue is all about, like what made you want to start it? What keeps you going? What sorts of things are you doing on there?   Elizabeth Fernandez 01:30 Yeah, sure. So I started spark dialogue about I guess, six years ago now. And so I have almost 100 episodes, I'm getting there quickly. And we talk about all different things in science and technology. But the thing that kind of sets us apart from a lot of the science podcasts is to see the connections of science with our everyday life. So a lot of times we talk about ethics or philosophy, talk about a religion a lot that we talk about history, art, culture, and all how all those things relate to science. And so basically, the idea is to, to show that science isn't just, you know, something that's being done in the lab somewhere. And it's something that is like it's affecting our lives every day, and affecting our lives in really interesting ways. And sort of making people think about those interesting connections between science and other different areas of their life that   Zack Jackson 02:28 might engage new people into the science conversation. And congratulations on almost being at 100 episodes. That is not easy. I thought it was a lot easier until I started a podcast and my goodness. Thank you just launched 93 was the last one which was   Elizabeth Fernandez 02:48 Yeah, that sounds right.   Zack Jackson 02:49 It's very interesting talk with john van sloten. about gratitude and COVID tide, which he was on our podcast as well. Those of you who may remember this somewhat scientific mistake patent Canadian pastor perpetual optimist, it's a it's a wonderful episode that you should listen to the most latest one, you've covered so many different types of topics in these 93 episodes. It's, it's pretty, it's pretty impressive how much of a generalist you're able to be for someone who is also a very much a specialist in in the world of astronomy, but you kind of have to be right if you're a science communicator in the public sphere.   Elizabeth Fernandez 03:35 So and that's what's that's what's fun about it, that's, I love, you know, waking up in the morning and not knowing what I'm going to learn today, learning about new things every day, it's a lot of fun, as also allows me to make a lot of different connections between different fields, which like, you know, if you're, if you're a specialist really deep into your and that's what I used to be really deep into my own field, you don't really know what's going on a lot in other fields. And it's nice to be able to see the connections between different fields and and see what you can extrapolations you can make How do you kind of plan out what's next? There are tons of people doing really interesting research out there. And so I kind of just, I kind of look for the people and I look for what they're doing. Because they know, they know what's the interesting questions in their own field are. And so you know, I go to conferences, I read a lot a lot, and kind of seeking out the people who would be interesting to talk to, and then I talked to them and see what they're working on and see what excites them. And you know, most of these topics I went to been able to come up with on my own because I don't know everything. And these, these are the people that they're really smart in their field and, and there's a lot of people working on interdisciplinary work in their own way. And so that's I look for look for the people.   Zack Jackson 05:02 What do you think that we should be talking about in the public sphere that we're not really focusing on right now?   Elizabeth Fernandez 05:11 That's a good question. I think a lot of things we are talking about to some extent, but we're not necessarily talking about it in a really broad sense. One of those that comes to mind is, of course, climate change. Everyone's talking about climate change. But a lot of times, it's a science question, or it's a policy question, which of course it is. But I think people don't realize how much of a moral question it is, how much of a spiritual or religious question it is. Climate change is really one of those areas that touches everything, every aspect of our life. And especially for people who are living on the other side of the world, who are in you know, places like Sub Saharan Africa, or Bangladesh, or the South Pacific, they're living with these issues. And for them, it's like, it's a cultural issue. It's a, it's an issue they live with every single day. And, you know, we as privileged people in the West don't necessarily always see that. Another one is just like, ethics and technology, like a lot of people are very excited, who work in the tech fields, they're very excited to develop the next up and coming tech, but there's not necessarily a lot of talk of the ethics behind it. And so there are a lot of people who do go and they say, Okay, what, what do we have to look with what we have to be concerned with, and they're trying to engage with the people who are developing tech to make sure that the tech that is developed is, is, to some degree, you know, safe is where we're thinking about issues that we should be thinking of, and how it, how it affects people culturally, how it affects, like, development of children, all sorts of things, like all things we should be   Zack Jackson 07:05 thinking, didn't Google just fire its ethics team for questioning Google's ethics?   Elizabeth Fernandez 07:12 It is, it is a thorny issue, because a lot of people are afraid to bring up what the ethics may be if it's threatens making money. And you know, a lot of these companies, that's what their goal is, is to make money. And luckily, for us, there are people who are concerned with other things besides just how much is on their on their budget. But yeah, I mean, a lot of times these questions definitely come into conflict with with the bottom line.   Zack Jackson 07:42 So you've done a lot of interfaith work, as well as interdisciplinary work and international work. You're kind of an inter specialist. And when it comes to issues of technology, and of ethics, one of the questions that comes up sometimes is whose ethics who kind of gets to be the gatekeeper in determining what is and is not good in terms of the technology that we create the society we're making? Do you have any, any thoughts, any insights into that power dynamic moving forward? And   Elizabeth Fernandez 08:21 yeah, that definitely is one of the things that people think about because, you know, every world religion has a different set of ethics. But at the same time, there's a lot of overlap between religions. But that is a question that people have to take into account, especially like, let's say you're marketing a product in very different places, you're marketing a product in the Middle East, or in Europe, or the United States, or wherever. A lot of that will have to do with the local area that you're dealing with. So if you're planning on marketing, something in the Middle East, you should get people who are experts of what people actually think in the Middle East. But it is tricky, and that's, that's why it's important to have a lot of dialogue with people because it is it is one of those things that there are multiple opinions and it's not fact it's not like science and which which is a fact you have to you have to talk to people and that's why dialogue is important in instances like this, yeah.   Zack Jackson 09:31 So before you were masterful science communicator, you were an astrophysicist astronomer. I'm I'm I'm still not great with the the titles, but you did.   Elizabeth Fernandez 09:47 As long as you don't call me. Don't call me an astrologer.   Zack Jackson 09:53 You were one of the match. I you looked at pretty stars in This guy with big telescopes, that's I'll go there. I know that much. Can you can you tell us a little bit about what that work looked like? What you were studying what you've you've worked on?   Elizabeth Fernandez 10:14 Sure. I'm just gonna go back and say that one last sentence cuz I called myself in this or as long as you don't call me an astrologist, which isn't a word. Yeah, so I'll say it again. As long as you don't call me an astrologer. There you go. Yeah, so I've done, I've done a lot of different things. In astronomy, most of my work on telescopes have actually been telescopes in space. So like, for example, the Herschel Space Telescope is, is a lot like Hubble, except it looks in the infrared. And so I did a lot of my work with that. I've also been observing several places, some small, some small telescopes around the world. Also, I went to Mauna Kea in Hawaii and observed there, the Vla in New Mexico, that's a big array of radio dishes. For if you've seen the movie contact, that's that's where I was at. But actually, most of my work was actually theoretical. So I didn't always go out to the telescope at night, I was doing a lot of my work on computers making models and simulations of what the universe might be like. So my work is talking about our was my work was talking about what the first few generations of stars and galaxies in the universe would look like. And the thing is, when you're looking at stars that are forming many, many, many, billions of years ago, there's a big difference between what stars look like then and what stars look like now. And the main difference is because stars that are forming now, they have all different types of things in them. They have, of course, hydrogen, helium, but they also have elements like carbon, iron, silicon, all these types of things that we see around us. But all of those heavier elements beyond helium, and a little bit of lithium, were formed actually, in stars and in supernova explosions. So if you go back in time to before there were any stars, that means that first generation of stars would only have hydrogen and helium. So the question is, what were the stars? Like? How did that affect the first few generations of stars. And so I worked with a lot of different people to look at. I worked with a lot of different people to develop models of what we should expect these stars to look like. And I worked in the infrared. I also worked with people who are working with a large Radio Telescope Array in Europe, which is called low far, and that looks at the radio emission from the areas around the stars, and just sort of kind of piecing together the puzzle of what the stars might be like. And it's tricky, because they're really, really far away. You know, as, as your listeners probably know, the farther away you look, the farther back in time you're looking. So in order to see the first stars that are forming, of course, you have to look very, very, very far away. And the problem with this is that there's a lot of stuff in the way there's, there's stuff in our own solar system, there's foreground stars, there's foreground galaxies, there's lots of stuff in space, it doesn't, it's not just empty. And so you have to figure out, you have to model all of those different things, to subtract that to find this very, very, very faint signal that's coming from the first stars, many, many, many light years away.   Zack Jackson 13:47 So you're basically finding the signals that are finding empty spaces between stars and galaxies and whatnot that have traveled all the way from the beginning to us.   Elizabeth Fernandez 14:01 So I was looking at the signal from the stars themselves, the signal from the galaxies themselves, and also the signal from the gas around the galaxies. And then and then is that answer your question? I'm not exactly sure if   Zack Jackson 14:18 the gap now you've got me in the way that, like, there are things in the way you can't look there or can't look through the sun to get to what's Far, far back. So like, if you're trying to look for, say, the cosmic microwave background radiation, I get that in the right order.   Elizabeth Fernandez 14:43 Yes.   Zack Jackson 14:46 You basically have to look for the signals that are not being interrupted by the stars and planets and things that are in the way are there's radiation that's going through some of those things. To us, or like how do we how do we cancel out the things that are in the way to see that far back in time?   Elizabeth Fernandez 15:08 Yeah, so that's very good question. And actually bringing up the cosmic microwave background is a really good analogy, because a lot of people are more familiar with that. So that's essentially exactly what we're looking at, except we're looking at the sky in the infrared. And this would. And so in order to see the stars that are forming, at the very beginning of the epic of stars, you do have to take into account everything in the way. And so it is, this light is going through dust, it's going through gas, it's going through galaxies that are too faint to see individually. So we have to figure out how many of these galaxies are out there. It's going through all sorts of stuff that we might not even know yet. And so that's part of the tricky part is trying to figure out well, is this light from the first stars? Or is it from something else that's closer to us that we just don't know, that we just don't see. And that's where the modeling comes in, is, that's why I was doing so much intensive modeling, to figure out, Okay, if these stars had these properties, what would this light look like? If it had this property? What would this light look like? And when you begin to combine a lot of different types of properties, a lot of different types of models with multiple types of observations, then you begin to narrow down what could potentially be from early stars and what could be potentially from something else? That's in the way. Wow.   Zack Jackson 16:38 feels a lot like archaeology. Scaring away all the dust and looking for the dinosaur bones underneath. That's this is exciting. What what what did the early universe look like? What did those early stars look like?   Elizabeth Fernandez 16:57 So, in this area, there's still a lot of unknowns. And that's sort of what we're trying to piece together is like, how big the stars were? How they ended their lives. So you know, in our local universe, we see stars explode in supernovas. Did this this happen? If like, let's say these first stars were really, really huge. Then there are all sorts of questions like, Where did the supermassive black holes in the center of galaxies come from? That's a really good question. Where, how did how do galaxies form in the first place? Like did did? Did we form galaxies first? And then these clumps of gas form stars? Or did the stars kind of congregate together? First, and then form galaxies? What kind of over the galaxies? like are they? Are they really small? Or were they were they bigger? Like all of these different types of questions we can ask? And yeah, that's, that's what's what's so tricky. There's, there's so many different things that we you can look at so many variables you can change. And it's a, it's like a laboratory that's, we can't see today we can we can look at our universe today and kind of make some guesses. But there are so many things that are different about the early universe that we just don't know.   Zack Jackson 18:23 Yeah, and I mean, like you said, this is evolving so quickly and changing so quickly. And there's so many new, I imagine that things like advances in computing power, is helping to advance this and new new telescopes on Earth and in space. Is there a particular telescope that is in the works that you're super excited about?   Elizabeth Fernandez 18:48 There's a lot of them. Of course, a lot of people probably heard JW st, which is sort of the successor to Hubble. And that should be able to see quite, it'll make it'll make the pictures from Hubble look, dated. And we should be able to see quite far back in time as well with this JW S T. And then there's lots of things being done. Probably people haven't heard as much about what's being done in the radio or in the submillimetre range. And there's lots of great telescopes all around the world, all different types of arrays, that can also look back in time. And then if you really want to go out there, you could look at the gravitational wave telescopes and gravitational telescopes, they can see even farther back then, than lights. And is this technology that still has a long way to go, but when we be we could be able to see even farther back than the cosmic microwave background, then we could figure out what our really infinite universe was like   Zack Jackson 19:49 we could see further back than that.   Elizabeth Fernandez 19:53 With a gravitation Oh my goodness. You can you can look even farther back. Yeah, that that is technology that is still alive. Anyway, but you know, within nano within 100 years, maybe Wow.   Zack Jackson 20:07 Wow. Okay. So you think within a couple of generations, we could get frighteningly close to being able to see the beginning of the universe. Now, not like the actual beginning, beginning, but like very close to the beginning, because we're already able to see pretty close to the beginning, right?   Elizabeth Fernandez 20:27 So yeah, the as far back, as we can see, with the cosmic microwave background, that's as far back we can see with light, that's when the universe was a baby, but it was still 400,000 years old, around 400,000 years old. So that's a lot of time that we don't have information from as far as observations, we have a lot of theoretical ideas. But as far as observations, we don't have any direct observations from before then. And so that's where gravitational waves might come in.   Zack Jackson 20:57 Wow, I guess you're right, that the ones the the telescopes, and all that are dealing in wavelengths and, and whatnot that are not visual are not as appealing to the general public, because they don't end up on the astronomy picture of the day website, like the way that the Hubble ones do?   Elizabeth Fernandez 21:17 Well, the, the issue with the cosmic microwave background is, before the cosmic microwave background, the universe was actually opaque. It was so dense that photons couldn't travel freely to us. There, it's like a, it's like a big photon soup, where photons are just bouncing off each other. And so light that's coming from before then can't reach us, because there are so many photons in the way that it will bounce off another photon before it gets to us. And it's only the only reason we can see the cosmic microwave background is that's the instant when the universe became less dense enough that photons were able to stream to us directly from that surface. Wow. So that's why we can't see before then, because the universe is so dense that not even light could really get anywhere. Without bouncing.   Zack Jackson 22:20 You're blowing my mind. Thanks a lot. It's just amazing to think about being able to look that far in the past. And like when you're saying that light couldn't reach us back then I think to myself, well weren't, weren't we in it back then. But now we're out. But we are seeing the back and the end when it was in the   Elizabeth Fernandez 22:53 Yeah, that's that's the that's the thing, when you come this to astronomy is you you can't think of of you have to think of time is another dimension, essentially, where we're far into the future, which is far away timewise. From what we're seeing, so time is, is you could think of it as a dimension. When you when you think about these problems. Yeah.   Zack Jackson 23:16 As many times as I've read about and heard explained, the expansion of the universe, it all still sounds like magic. So in your studying of the stars, the earliest stars, the beginnings of the universe, has your particular faith, spirituality, religion, whatever it may be for you. Has has, have you found any insights from from the work that you've done scientifically?   Elizabeth Fernandez 23:51 Yeah, I have quite a bit. So it's, I think the biggest one for me, is looking at the sheer size of the universe. And when you really get to learning about how big the universe is, and how detailed it is, and how long it was around before humans even existed, it, it The scale is literally something we just can't comprehend. Our little brains just can't comprehend it. And that's also true when you look at the complexity of physics, like when you see how complex physics is. You see how complex sciences, it's just amazing. And the universe didn't have to be that complex. For us to exist, the universe science doesn't have to be that complex for us to exist. As far as as far as from the point of view of God, let's say. So the fact that it is what does that tell us about God tells us maybe he has a lot of time on his hands. But it also is kind of neat because for me, it's like It, it's it's a way that I kind of look at it for people like me, God is giving a big puzzle to, like, how does it all work? How does it all fit together? And I think that part of it is, he just likes to give us something amazingly complex to ponder and to view. And of course, when you create something that's complex, that means the person who is creating it has to be even more complex than the person, the thing that's being created. And so that tells you how complex God is. So for me, that's sort of the insight I get from it. That's at least one.   Zack Jackson 25:41 If you don't mind, what what is your religious background?   Elizabeth Fernandez 25:46 Yeah, so I'm a Catholic. And growing up, right, being raised as a Catholic, we were very pro science. I don't know how many people know this. But the the person who came up with the idea of the Big Bang, George lamotta, he was a Jesuit priest. And so there's a lot of very pro science sentiments in the Catholic Church, and this is one of the one of the areas that it shows up. I mean, we have the Vatican Observatory in Rome, that's doing a lot of great science work. And there's a lot of a lot of priests who are astronomers, there's a lot of astronomers who work with priests and the other way around. So it's, there's a lot of conversation between the astronomy field and religious field.   Zack Jackson 26:37 We've gotten multiple messages from people on the podcast, saying, we really appreciate your, your thoughts and your insights, but you need more Catholics. There's no Catholic perspective on your podcast. And I'll always say the same thing. Like, yeah, I know. Right. And the Catholics have done such good work, how many bodies heavenly bodies are named after Jesuits. We often just think like, at least we in the Protestant world will be like, well, Catholics. Galileo, they hate science.   Elizabeth Fernandez 27:16 Yeah, it's, it's, that was a long time ago. It's, it's, it's a, it's a misunderstanding, you know. But for I mean, in general, like growing up as a Catholic, we're very pro science. So, you know, I've been very encouraged in my love of science. And that's great.   Zack Jackson 27:36 You said a little bit about how your scientific work has helped to illuminate your spirituality a little bit? Are there are the ways where you see it going the other way where your faith or religion or spirituality affects the way that you do science?   Elizabeth Fernandez 27:55 I've never been asked that question before. I think one of the biggest ways is, like we talked a bit before about the ethics. Now, astronomy and ethics, there's not a lot necessarily of overlap. But in the other areas that I've looked at, as far as like, looking at AI, looking at, like I mentioned before climate change, looking at to science in our everyday lives, medicine, that, that I think there's a lot more crossover there. As far as my, my faith affecting that. And as far as, as far as just doing science in general, particularly astronomy, I think that my philosophy and my faith sort of shows me that to be humble, in what I know. And this is a big thing, when you're looking when you're making models of the early universe, where, you know, you could have your favorite model, but chances are, it's wrong. And and sort of to be humble in that and to see okay, where could I have gone wrong? Where could I What can I change? How am I not seeing the whole picture? How am I? What kind of things could I think of, so it sort of brings a sense of humbleness, it's brings a sense of more maybe creativity in a way that that if I just was doing the science by itself and not thinking of, you know, just trying to get an answer. You know, I might not be having open of a mind to particular particularly different ideas or ways to approach the problem.   Zack Jackson 29:46 That is a very good insight. So, on a completely different note. You are a fellow lover of unusual musical instruments, correct? Yes, yes. Tell me about your favorites.   Elizabeth Fernandez 30:02 The one I'm learning now, since the pandemic has started, I have acquired a hammer dulcimer. Oh, hammer dulcimer. Yes. It's something I've wanted to learn for about a decade. And so I am very slowly learning it. I wish it was a little bit faster. But unfortunately, I thought it would have a lot of time with a pandemic started. But having small children at home, you don't really have a lot of time during a pandemic. But at least I have one now, and and I get to play it. And I do know a couple songs. And that's been a lot of fun. But yeah, I like lots of I like collecting lots of different musical instruments. One of my favorite memories from my college days was going to somebody's house for Thanksgiving. And they had just a big basket of musical instruments, all sorts of things like thumb organs and, and Morocco's and, you know, things that are easy to play, but she just passed it out of one take an instrument and everyone just made music together. And so a lot of times I collect little things like that. I have, like a steel drum. I have the Morgans, I have a Irish pennywhistle things that are easy to play, and, you know, just just to have that love of music around, just to have people playing. That's great.   Zack Jackson 31:25 Yeah, I love it. I got a I'm a mountain dulcimer. That was okay. It's made by a company called seagull and it's built like a guitar so you can play it standing up. And I I needed a slide guitar for a song that I was working on. But I don't have a like a dough bro. Like a slide guitar. So I discovered that if I use my mountain dulcimer, and socket from a socket wrench on my finger, that I can turn that into a pretty convincing sounding slide guitar. It is always useful for random instruments around your house. I love it. Yes.   Elizabeth Fernandez 32:07 Yes. Also, I also play guitar and I play piano as well. Those are a little bit less than less exotic instruments.   Zack Jackson 32:15 A little bit more versatile.   Elizabeth Fernandez 32:18 Yes, yes. People don't ask you what is that strange thing that you're playing?   Zack Jackson 32:22 What do you have a an instrument that you just want you love you just want to get one day if you are given some large amount of money.   Elizabeth Fernandez 32:33 Well, that's my hammer dulcimer. I've been wanting to play that for about a decade. And now I have a I have a small one. But I have one on my wish list that is multiple 1000s of dollars in one day, one day, hopefully I will own that one too. Once I'm a little bit better. I mean, you can justify it and have a little bit more spare money. podcasting doesn't make a lot of money, unfortunately. So   Zack Jackson 32:56 no.   Elizabeth Fernandez 32:59 No, it's a bummer.   Zack Jackson 33:00 This is my retirement plan. I reconsider. Well, if you ever come across as a hurdy gurdy, let me know if you've seen these old medieval instruments with a crank.   Elizabeth Fernandez 33:16 I I've seen them in Europe before fabulous. Yeah.   Zack Jackson 33:22 So what what made you want to apply for the for the Sinai and Synapses fellowship? What what drew drew you to it? How'd you find out about it?   Elizabeth Fernandez 33:33 Rabbi Jeff was actually on my podcast. A while ago, I talked to him about the Jewish perspective of evolution. Believe I was right. And, and so I, you know, one of the areas I look at is the area of overlap between science and religion, and a lot of different ways, different different religions to not just Catholic or not just Christianity, but also all different religions approach science and what that overlap is. And so when I found out about that fellowship, it just seemed like a natural fits, but also a really good opportunity to meet other people who are working on this. Because, you know, unless unless you really look, it's kind of hard to find people sometimes, you know, we're not, we're not a very vocal crowd, or I mean, I'm hoping to change that. But and many people are hoping to change that. But you know, people, they, they hear a lot about the conflict between science and religion, and they miss the fact that there are so many people who are working in science and religion, but not necessarily on the fact that are they compatible, which is which is an important question. But there's so much more to the dialogue than that. There's, there's a lot of really rich discussion we can have if we begin to step away from you know, just the sheer fact are they compatible to you know, what we can actually learn what we can actually Come up with together when we just have discussions.   Zack Jackson 35:02 Yeah. It's why the work that you're doing is so important. This is the reason why we started this podcast was because we were like, this is such important work. And all of us in this fellowship, the first day that we met together, we realized, we all feel alone in our context, but we're not. We're just, we just don't have a common group to rally around. Uh, I don't know what what it is. So we thought podcasting is a good way to get the word out there. It's accessible. It's easy. And we found that to be true with so many people who have joined the community as well, that actually the last review that we got on iTunes said, I'm not the only one. And it was like, Yeah, no, you're not. There's a, there's a whole lot of us out here, despite the fact that there's only like three podcasts on Apple that are about this. There are so many of us. And I think the work of translating the work coming from the ivory tower into like, applicable practical and practical conversations is so important. Yes, and you do have a knack for, for doing that for communicating all of these really complicated topics that are so vastly diverse, in in really easy to understand ways. I do enjoy your podcast a lot. Thank you. So at the end of our conversation here, then I want to ask you the question that I've asked everyone so far, which is, what is one thing that you wish everyone knew about the world? Yes, I've   Elizabeth Fernandez 36:45 been, I've been thinking about this preparing myself.   Zack Jackson 36:50 I love that you did your homework.   Elizabeth Fernandez 36:56 You know, you can look at this in a scientific way. And you could look at this in a non scientific way. But for me, I think that it's important. That's when we look at each other. We look at people around the world, we look at people in our community, who on the surface look very different from us, or who seemed very different than us. We're actually not that different. When you look at evolution, you see how, how much work we have in common, how much debt different communities of people are basically the same. When you're going through something that you just feel like I'm the only person in the world that is suffering through this. And then you're not, you're just there are so many people who know exactly what you're feeling, or who have been there before. Even with cultures that are different, like when I did a lot of interfaith work, and people have these, these still very pervasive biases against people of different religions. And when you really look at it, we're there are some differences. But a lot of those differences are on the surface, when it comes down to it deep down. We're all real, pretty the same. We all we're all we all go through the same problems, we all feel the same things. And if people realize that, I think you know, there wouldn't be any problems in the world.   Zack Jackson 38:19 Love it. Thank you for that. Thank you for spending this time to come on here and and talk with us. For all of you at home. Her podcast is spark dialogue. It's one word, SP a rk DIAL l o g. And that's available wherever you get your podcasts as well as spark dialogue, calm if you'd like to learn more about what she does and what she has done and what she cares about and all of the good things that she's doing.   Elizabeth Fernandez 38:52 Well, thank you very much for inviting me.   Zack Jackson 38:53 Absolutely. My pleasure.

Episode 77 In part 11 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Muhammad Aurangzeb Ahmad. He is an Affiliate Associate Professor in the Department of Computer Science at University of Washington and the Principal Data Science Researcher at KenSci. He is also an advisor on AI to the ministry of Science and Technology of Maldives, and has published over 50 research papers on machine learning and artificial intelligence. His research centers on fairness and equity concerning the role of artificial intelligence in healthcare.   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 76 If you had the power to augment your body so that you could live forever, would you do it? If life-saving technology exists, are we morally obliged to use it? Have we outsmarted natural selection, and do we now have the duty to take homo sapien evolution into our own hands? Living well, dying responsibly, and the wonderfully provocative world of transhumanism on this week's episode of Down the Wormhole.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis

Episode 75 In part 10 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Seth Villegas. He is a PhD student in constructive theology at Boston University. He focuses primarily on how technology affects religious and religious-like ideas. His current research examines transhumanist and other secular communities, asking questions about the future of religious life. We talk about the incoming technological utopia/dystopia, the search for meaning, and the nature of the human soul.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 73 In part 9 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Matthew Groves. He was once described on NPR as a "one man science-religion reconciliation committee". With a background in Physics and a Master of Divinity, he comfortably navigates both worlds and makes it look easy. We talk about strategic bridge building, climate advocacy, and doing this work in multiple spaces.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 67 Did you hear? Scientists found life on Venus! Well... Not quite. But maybe! Also maybe not... It's all a bit uncertain, but we're here to untangle it for you. We're talking biosignatures, poop on the moon, rainbow fingerprints, corned beef space sandwiches, and our future tardigrade overlords. It's a lot of fun!    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis    Show Notes Arecibo collapses: https://www.npr.org/2020/12/01/940767001/arecibo-observatory-telescope-collapses-ending-an-era-of-world-class-research  Poop on the moon: https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2019/3/22/18236125/apollo-moon-poop-mars-science  https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/moon-mars/a13598/is-there-poop-on-the-moon-17630231/  Astrobiology intro: https://astrobiology.nasa.gov/about/history-of-astrobiology/  Spectroscopy: https://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/science/toolbox/spectra1.html  Big bird in space:  https://www.history.com/news/big-bird-challenger-disaster-nasa-sesame-street  Corned beef sandwich in space: https://www.thevintagenews.com/2018/02/22/corned-beef-sandwich-in-space/ https://www.space.com/39341-john-young-smuggled-corned-beef-space.html  Adam’s book: https://www.amazon.com/Living-Tiny-Aliens-Anthropocene-Groundworks/dp/0823287718/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1607044336&sr=1-1-5e875a02-02b1-4426-9916-8a5c26cd5a14 

In part 7 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with the Dr. Telli Davoodi. She is a postdoctoral fellow in psychology at Princeton University, and her research focuses on religious and scientific cognition and what psychological roles they serve. She has studied childhood development across the world and has some fascinating insights as to how children learn to process religion and science.  Are religious children more likely to accept unseen entities like germs? Are we messing up our children by teaching them about Santa and Jesus when they're young and expecting they can tell them apart later? How do children in non-Christian countries perceive science and religion? All that and more!    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Space: the final frontier... Nothing captivates our imagination like the vast expanse of outer space. For as long as humans have been alive, we've been inspired by the stars, the planets, and what exists beyond our terrestrial shell. In this miniseries, we are going to explore some of the ways that the leading edge of astronomy, astrophysics, astrobiology, and other astro-disciplines are pushing us to reexamine and redefine our theologies. We're kicking this project off with a simple question:   "What will be the next Copernican Revolution?"   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 64 In part 6 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with the Rabbi Jordan Shaner. He is the assistant rabbi at Temple Sinai Congregation of Toronto, Ontario. His rabbinic thesis focused on theologies in the Babylonian Talmud, including on the way the Talmud presents the intersection between physiology, health, religious practice and spirituality. He is a member of the Toronto Board of Rabbis and represents that organization as a board member of Christian-Jewish Dialogue of Greater Toronto, which fosters relationships between a number of faith communities in the Greater Toronto Area.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 63 We're wrapping up our miniseries on big emotions with one of the most important ones, gratitude. Over the past 20 years, researchers have shown what we've intrinsically known for hundreds of thousands of years: gratitude is the key to happiness. It binds us together as a society, buoys our own mental health, and draws us closer to the divine. How might you let gratitude work its magic in your life today?    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 62 In part 5 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with the Rev Dr Kristel Clayville. She is the former Acting Director of the Zygon Center for Religion and Science at the Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago as well as a Senior Fellow at the MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics at the University of Chicago. Clinically, she works as a chaplain and ethicist at the University of Chicago Medical Center, and focuses on the existential and spiritual issues facing organ transplant patients. Her early research was on the uses of the Hebrew Bible in environmental ethics, but more recently, she has turned toward the intersection between environmental ethics and bioethics to study the green burial movement and organ donation. Welcome to the podcast, the Rev Dr Kristel Clayville.   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 61 In part 5 of our miniseries on "big emotions", we're talking about resiliency. Yes, that's right. After digging into awe, disgust, shame, and anger, we're concluding with some practical advice for being alive. We're joined by Licensed Professional Clinical Counselor Micah Roberts who shares their expertise after years of helping at-risk communities learn to thrive under pressure. With the election less than a week away, a new wave of COVID cases in the US and Europe, and just the usual stressors of being alive, this episode is perfectly timed to help you to bounce back and be your best you today.    *Micah Roberts, Licensed Professional Clinical Counselor (referred to in this episode as Abra Morgan)   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

In part 4 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Carolyn Hall. She is a Brooklyn based historical marine ecologist, science communications instructor, and award winning contemporary dancer/performer. As a marine ecologist she has been an independent researcher for the Wildlife Conservation Society, Trout Unlimited, and the Environmental Defense Fund. She was part of an UMass Amherst academic team studying fish and the coastal ecosystem of the northeast U.S., is the research assistant and fact checker for the best selling author Paul Greenberg (Four Fish), and she will be working with the American Fisheries Society to communicate climate change policies. She worked as a certified instructor at the Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science and is a core member and researcher in residence with the eco-artist collective Works on Water. Her continued career in dance has led her to work with artists across the country and internationally and she is increasingly invested in combining her artist and scientist halves to make data-rich science more understandable, embodied, and memorable for the general public.    Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis