#1

"The broad answer to the why of any part or connection is likely to be – because it is most efficient in time, space, and energy."

Based on the notions about system optimization through a long evolutionary process, it is easy to fall for an idea that everything about us is optimally designed. Even though on a small scale (nano- to millimeters), things seem to be optimized, we can see flaws in our design on a macroscopic level. Which ones can you observe?

Once again, evolution does not aim for perfection. Firstly, if a trait/quality is not lowering the reproduction success - there is no pressure to alter it. Secondly, evolution seldom produces new adaptations from scratch but usually reuse/repurpose something that already exists.

#2

You have read about our human ability to occupy a quasi-infinite number of niches. Which key adaptations do you think made it possible? When do you look at those adaptations - where lies their trade-off? 

What have we lost in the process, or put differently, what is the downside of humans being able to occupy any niche?

Let's change the focus of the question from our species to yourself. What is your personal niche? How is your body prepared/fit to meet the challenges of your daily experiences? Where do you observe the gaps? How have you adapted (on different time scales - decades, years, months, days, hours) for your particular niche?

#3

How does the aging process fit into the optimization concept? As you could examine, many physiological processes on a molecular and cellular level are optimized — still, errors happen, the aging process (decline in function) advances. What are your thoughts on this subject?

#4

Darwin, in articulating the deepest principle in biology identified the key constraint – resource availability. 

Now that we (on a personal level) have access to unlimited energy - how does it affect our physiology and behavior? If efficiency is not a necessity and the energetical resources are not scarce but are freely available - what does it change for us?

Speaking of constraints — What forces/pressures are acting on you now? 

#5

Is the understanding of how's and why's regarding human design necessary for people to make the right decisions/actions? In other words – do we need a science-based guide to successfully navigate through life?

Before you answer, think of the notions: I. explanations change all the time – experience remains constant; II. making decisions based on payoffs, not knowledge.

‍

#1

How is relying on vision as a primary source of information affecting us beyond the obvious? 

How can different visual depth, optical flow, light conditions, novelty, the complexity of the scene we see, along with other visual information we gather from our environment affect our nervous system and subsequently our behavior?

#2

As we have seen - longevity is embedded in the design of our species. In foraging communities, the human life cycle must extend with sufficient vitality for individuals over 45 to contribute extra nutrition. After that, we see a sharp rise in mortality around the early 60s.

Does the higher age (60+) decline in production/mortality rise coincide with being less active (replaced by the younger generation) or just being less efficient (but still actively engaged)?

No matter the case, if older people would not lose a productive place in society and stay more active and motivated, would we see a less sharp rise in mortality in this age?

#3

Usually, we think of particular neurochemical processes driving our behavior. We alter the neurochemistry - we change the behavior.

However, from an evolutionary standpoint, a more bidirectional relationship between physiology and behavior can be observed - in which our evolutionary behavior influenced and shaped our physiology. 

The result - throughout evolution, as dictated by efficiency principles of design, our system utilized the consequences of our behaviors and got accustomed to them.

Example n.1 - as foraging and hunting was our behavioral set-point, our human physiology necessarily evolved within the context of high levels of lifelong daily aerobic and cognitive work. By taking this behavior out from our lives, we take out the consequential vital cascade of internal processes of those actions - cerebral perfusion, the release of various signaling molecules, growth factors, etc. And without those necessary inputs to which our system got so used to over the millennia - our body and brain cannot function right.

Example n.2 - The hunter-gatherer communal lifestyle was associated with intrinsically triggered dopamine release in small pulses, each timed to provide a brief reward to a positive prediction error. Modern life apparently causes a chronic deficiency in dopamine release. Consequently, our venerable foraging circuits drive us to find external remedies. Therefore, when mental health problems arise out of changes in our neurophysiology (low dopamine), it might be a consequence of altered behavior.

Are the behavioral set-points of our ancestors necessary for us to follow for our physiology to function well? Or do you see a way around it?

For further reading on the link between aerobic activity and cognitive work, read this article.

#4

The theme of externalizing practically anything beneficial gave our species an enormous advantage. It seems that in modern times, we are only following an already established trend. Might the over-reliance on externalization (of navigation, knowledge, physical work, etc.) be harmful to us? Where do you think is the silver lining?

#5

"Sapiens design necessarily couples extreme individuality to extreme sociality."

In this notion, the author articulated perhaps the most crucial aspect of our being. A necessary step for computational expansion, extreme interpersonal variability—as in personality traits—inevitably brought inequality on an individual level, and with it - psychological distress.

Once buffered by cultural customs and sacred practices, the modern way of living seems to go in an opposing direction. The culture of developed countries enhances the socioeconomic differences - the primary cause of psychological stress.

Where do we go from here? How do we need to adapt as individuals and as a society? Where would you start?

#6

As you have learned – the neural circuits that produce and process so-called "sacred practice" activities occupy substantial cortical territory. Knowing that principled design uses expensive circuits only as needed, the neural investments to produce and process music, art, drama, and humor indicates their central importance to our human success.

Viewing the sacred practices in this light – might these seemingly unimportant free time activities grow in importance in the eyes of society?

#7

In the book The Molecule of More, the author D. Z. Lieberman describes the human species problem as too much dopamine and imbalance between the dopaminergic system and the here & now system. How does Sterling's notion of dopamine deficit fit into this context? Are these two notions in conflict or they describe the same issue accurately but from a different angle?

In either case, we can observe a clear trend—explanation changes, the experience (outcome) stays. Our understanding of brain functioning is still in the beginning. The precise mechanisms and our knowledge about relationships between neurotransmitters will probably change in the future. But this does not change the fact, that outcomes (our behavior) altered vastly across the previous millennia compared to our foraging ancestors - and we are miserable as a result of it.

‍

#1

How has your view on the concept of health changed after reading the whole book?

#2

Based on your updated knowledge - imagine yourself being your own doctor. What would you prescribe for yourself? What interventions would have the most significant and consequential impact and why?

Following up on the theme of self-prescription: Genetic variations produce innate differences in key metabolic and neural circuits — but they are all profoundly shaped by experience. Looking at this issue from this perspective - should we be more active curators of our own experiences? How much do you reflect on your experiences and the composition of your days/weeks etc.?

‍

#3

When you look back at the book's structure – do you think it is necessary to know the process of how things evolved (the past) to understand the present form and function? Or is it sufficient to study the organism as it is at the current time?

‍

- a technique derived from Richard Feynman, who excelled in his ability to synthesize and explain even complex scientific concepts. By using this technique right after you have finished the book, you will further enhance your understanding of the book's subject, identify the possible gaps in your knowledge and master the ability to clearly communicate the newly acquired information.

It consists of the following steps:

‍

01. Teach it to a child

Take out a blank sheet of paper and write the central concept of the book you have just finished in the top corner. Underneath, write down everything you know about this concept, without revisiting your notes or the book. The trick is, however, that you have to write in style, as if you wanted to teach a given concept to a 12-year-old child. Unlike your intelligent adult friends, 12-year-olds do not have scientific / technical terminology and specific jargon. Plus, they do not hold attention for too long. Therefore, you need to be clear and concise, and use language, which vocabulary can be easily understood by a child, so it can grasp the basic ideas and relationships.

‍

02. Identify your knowledge gaps

As you write, you will get to points where you will not be able to explain something in simple words, you will not be able to recall some key information, or you will have trouble tying the individual parts together to make clear connection.

In other words, you will encounter gaps in your knowledge... and that is the point, where you are really starting to learn!

Now that you know where you got stuck, go back and re-read particular passages in the book, review your own notes, or look for other source materials that address this concept. This process is necessary for you to fill in all the cracks that emerged from the previous step, and skipping it leads to the illusion of your knowledge.

‍

03. Organize, simplify and tell a story

At this point, you have a set of manually created notes in front of you. Go through them and create one continuous story, which will contain the key terms, relationships, and ideas of the concept you have just studied.

Practice reading the created story aloud. Pretend you're telling a story to a class of younger students. This way you will hear where your speech ceases to be simple and concise - avoid jargon and complicated sentences. Stumbles in the speech will again indicate to you the incompleteness of your thoughts. Practice until you are satisfied with the simplicity, straightforwardness, and fluency of your presentation. Ideally, invite live listeners who will give you feedback.