Listener Mail: Halloween Hangover 2019

that is always very tight and very busy. Yeah, yeah, this and then this is a good time to first of all, to have one more heaping scoop of Halloween right here in the gray zone between the end of October and you know, the beginning of saying Thanksgiving and Christmas like the full on holidays. Well, and we have we have so much great content to read here. And then after that it's gonna be it's gonna be all Christmas around here. It's gonna be Holidays like like like

you've never seen it before. But also we've got some weird science lined up for the next few weeks that that you probably wouldn't believe, so you should be very excited, all right, And I'm excited as well to have Carney here with us, our mail bot who's been with us the whole time, continually changing over the years, getting new new augments, new programming, etcetera. And today is no different, right.

Carney seems to have been very interested in our episodes about photography burned from the Mind's Eye, the idea of projecting images onto film that a lot of supposed psychics throughout the years have claimed to be able to do. We talked about that in a couple of Halloween episodes, and and Carney has really caught the bug. So now instead of printing out listener mail as he normally does,

he projects it psychically robotically onto various bread products. So we will be reading your listener mails burned from Carney's Mind's Eye onto Tortilla's toast. PETA's all the like. Yeah, he's not supposed to be paying attention into the Invention podcast listener mail, but I think he caught a few regarding our episode on toast, and that may have also led to this current obsession. Here we go, should we jump right in, Robert, let's do it? What alright, This

first message comes to us from our listener Alex. This is about the Burned from the Mind's Eye episode, and Alex writes in Hi, Robert and Joe, I just listened to the burn from the Mind's Eye podcast. A major and in visual studies in college, and remember to study about retinal mapping in the mid century. They showed a monkey a simple image and placed a radioactive film directly

on the visual cortex with the monkey's brain exposed. It was basically photosensitive paper, but was sensitive to the electrical impulses of the brain. The results were a pretty accurate neuronal map to the visual stimulus, but slightly distorted. Basically, the retina is mapped specially onto the brain. While the same process probably couldn't reproduce Garfield or a complex image, you can actually get a picture to actually from the brain.

Since the occipital or visual cortex is involved in mental imagery as well as in vision, it follows that with technology from the fifties and sixties, you might be able to make thoughtography of an imagined simple shape. That's assuming the visual cortex response of an imagined image is mapped

the same as a visually stimulated response. So what's going on here is we were discussing in the episode how imagery is represented in the brain, and our proposition was that there's not a screen inside the brain that the brain watches imagery take place on that could be projected straight out onto thoughtography. Uh, this sort of complicates it somewhat now, I think as Alex is saying, there's no way you could like find an image of Garfield somewhere

in the brain. That doesn't seem to exist even if you're picturing Garfield. But there does seem to be some correlation between what parts of the visual field are being stimulated with various types of light and what parts of the occipital cortex in the back of the head show the most activity. So you can sort of map places on the retina basically parts of the visual field of things you're looking at, to certain parts of the brain

showing increased activity. And I think one consequence of this is that if you show somebody like a very simple black and white shape, you could almost sort of see a version of that shape represented in brain activity in the occipital cortex. So, yeah, it all seems to be just a matter of you know, fine tuning the technology

and the data needed to translate this information. Yeah, and again this probably doesn't work as well, or almost certainly doesn't work as well once the image has more complexity to it. Especially, I think it makes a difference, you know, once you consider talking talking about like the moving of the focus of the eyes and all this. But you know, you can represent parts of the retina, parts of the visual field within a sort of uh a map of

the visual processing center of the brain. Uh. And I didn't know this before, so thank you so much for sharing, Alex. This is really interesting. I still don't think this would really make thoughtography anymore plausible, because, I mean, there are multiple problems. Uh. Photography tends to project images as you would take with a camera. And again this is not you're You're not getting maps on the brain projecting complex images.

It's more sort of like rough correlations of areas of the brain to parts of shapes that you would look at. But and then also like how would the signal escape the skull. The fact that people tended to do it at a distance or with the thing in the front of the head instead of in the back. I think they're there are multiple reasons for saying that this, this doesn't really make photography anymore plausible unless you were to say, remove the skull and only look at extremely simple shapes

and accept very distorted versions of them as you're projected image. Well, and it reminds me to how we've talked in the past about how, you know, a lot of times we're reaching for an idea of how psychic transmission of ideas could occur, how I can get the contents of my skull into your skull. And then we overlooked the fact that we have this thing called language that does exactly that. Uh, so, yeah, this might be just another bridge between minds, this one

though technological as opposed to linguistic exactly. Uh, Robert, do you mind if I jump onto the next one, because it's kind of related. So we were talking about the question it was raised in one of the papers we looked at of whether mental imagery could be unconsciously perceived. Can you picture something without being conscious of perceiving it? This is a strange question, And Robert, you said, well, wait, could you even see something in with regular vision without

being conscious of it? And I answered that I thought there was some evidence for this, like in the invisible guerilla line of research. I seemed to recall there were some things where like people wouldn't consciously note seeing a guerrilla, but then they might be primed on the subject of guerrillas afterwards, so like maybe some part of them had

seen it, but they weren't conscious of seeing it. But after recording the episode, some listeners brought up the condition, and I also thought of the condition that that I should have mentioned there, which is blind site, which we definitely should have thought of because we're both big fans of the Peter Wattson novel where he invokes the concept.

But basically, blind site is a neurological condition in which people can respond to visual stimuli behaviorally, and yet they believe they are blind or blind in some particular part of their visual field. So like you can, I don't know, for example, somebody could toss a ball at you and you could reach up and catch it, but you are but you are not conscious of seeing the ball, like you don't believe you can see it or have seen it. Yeah, yeah,

I mean certainly with the ball. I think we've all had that, that situation where you're just suddenly catching the ball or I've had. I had that situation when my son was younger, where he he fell off of some playground equipment and suddenly I was like holding him the foot, Uh, you know where it's It's just another in another part

of our mental machinery is kicking in to make that possible. Yes, And so what I think this means is that it seems to me the brain is perfectly capable of processing visual imagery and reacting in some cases in some ways without making that imagery available to the conscious part of the brain that talks. So Yes, I think there's definitely evidence that it's possible to see unconsciously with regular vision. But that still leaves the other question unanswered, whether it's

possible to imagine visual imagery unconsciously? Can you picture Garfield without knowing your picturing Garfield? And our next email addresses this. So this is from our listener Tanya. Tanya says, Hey, guys, you mentioned the question can mental imagery be unconscious? I have some experience concerning this question. Sometimes, when I read a novel or play a rather boring game on the computer, I suddenly become aware that my mind was busy the last hour with understanding what I read and in the

same time picturing something completely unrelated. Normally it's a landscape of some sort, something I know more or less well, I move in this area, similar to the movement you do when you use Google street View. I had this experience long before Google and its maps was invented. Uh. The pictures I produce are not put into words, but stay completely visual until I become aware. Therefore, I would

call them unconscious. It happens that I come to places I haven't been to physically in years, but as soon as I see them again, I remember having been there recently in my mind. Oh that's interesting, kind of creepy feeling. But in the moment of picturing them, I was completely unaware. Sometimes I'm astounded how inaccurate my inner maps are, Like

all memories are, I guess. Fascinated listener from Germany Tanya. Interesting. Yeah, So this this whole idea, and I think this is why it was so perplexing when we talked about it the first time. Is we really have to figure out what we mean by being conscious of seeing something or conscious of having a visual image of it. Does that

mean that I are we just talking about? Uh? It occurring at all, are we talking about me having uh, like a focused awareness of it, you know, uh, And I feel like there's there's sort of room on a scale between the two. Yeah, I mean it's kind of hazy. I understand what Tanya is talking about here, like having the idea that you retrospectively remember that you were thinking about something, but you don't have the impression that you were conscious of thinking about it when you were thinking

about it. Well, like, like, here's a question when you're in the shower and you're having like shower thoughts, like, are you conscious of those thoughts? Is this there's it's not directed cognition perhaps, you know, but it's I wouldn't say that I am unconscious when I'm having you know, various images and ideas rolling through my head, or if I'm you know, staring off into space and daydreaming. Um. Yeah,

I mean it's weird. We almost think of consciousness is is like the definitive property of directed cognition, right, But like, if you are thinking about something, it's almost implied that necessarily it's conscious, but maybe not. I don't know. Consciousness is so weird again, It's well, let's move on to the next listener mail that Karney has for us, because this will add even more fuel to the fire. All right, this one comes to us from Windy. Windy rides in

and says, hi, guys, First, the democ Oregan episode was tremendous. Second, you can definitely unconsciously envisioned things I always thought I thought in words, mostly until I started meditating. I was surprised to realize that there was a background of images accompanying the monologue. They impacted and augmented what I thought,

and I had no idea they were there. Meditation is neat, So I love it that they brought up meditation because that's also one of the things that I thought about, the idea that, yes, when I engaging in a meditative state, I will sometimes have well, very often, I think, have engaged with visual imagery that arises, you know, um unsummoned, you know. But when I really get down and start thinking about it again, I'm asking myself, well, does that

mean that that I am unconscious of this image? Like I am, I am aware of the imagery taking place. It is, it is perceived by me, even if it feels like I am less in control of it. But does that mean that it's somehow always back there. It gets gets really tricky. I feel like we end up in a situation where we can't really see the forest for the trees, you know, we get into that blind

brain effect. And to come back to meditation, I mean, of course, when you're meditation is all about awareness and about consciousness and changing the way that your awareness is focused, taking it, you know, away from these things that you would normally miss and focusing on something that is there here in the present. Yeah, alright, here's another one. This one comes to us from Skylar. Hey, guys, Skyler from Kansas. Just finished listening to Burned from the Mind's Eye Part

two and the end. What you talked about a neural network being able to draw mental images was really great. It reminded me of a YouTube channel called data Bots. It's d A d A dotta bots. I guess not like data where a neural network is creating live death metal and jazz music. Seven. I've actually heard this. Yeah, yeah, it's like AI generated death metal that's just streamed constantly. Is it death metal jazz? Is that? I think these

are two different things, maybe two different channels. Yeah, maybe the one I heard it sounded kind of like like MS sugar, you know, sort of more a tonal, but they're definitely funk elements in sugar though, But I don't know about I don't know about jazz. Um Okay, well this is the sounds interesting anyway, Scotler continues. The longer I listened to it, the crazier and more real the music sounds. Just thought you would like that, love the show,

keep it up. This is interesting because it touches on I think this this really intriguing idea of the future of creative AI, and that is that not that you would have a machine that makes all your death metal or a machine that makes all your jazz, it writes all your books, etcetera. Um, I you know, maybe we'll get to that point. But I think the more exciting idea is that, of course you have humans using AI

to augment their existing talents and creative ideas. So someone saying I want to make a jazzy death metal album, Um, but I want to I want to break free from sort of the you know, the boxes that are enclosing me here, and then you might turn to creative AI as a way to sort of discover where you could break free and also then be able to rein it in and say, well, I don't really want to go in this direction or this action, but here's a direction

I never even thought off before. You could almost use AI kind of like a creative each ing or something, you know, like introducing elements of of random input for you to sort through and make your own sense of. Yeah. Yeah, And of course there have been creative methodologies like that performer reminded of the cut Up Machine exactly approach to

fiction totally. All right. So this next message comes in response to our episode I Drink Your Blood Type, which which had one of our favorite skits in a while, I think about the Blood Club. Yeah, and then it was about blood types and also about the idea of people believing in blood type personality correlations like some of the blood type horoscopes and things blood blood type diets and so forth. This was a really great piece of

feedback from our listener Annie. She says, Hey, guys, I love the show, and I just listened to the episode on blood. Being a geneticist and neuroscientist, I thought I would add my two cents worth in relation to your comments about blood type being linked to certain personality traits. While blood type is simply inherited by a single gene, locusts. Personality is complex and is an interaction of many genes

and environment. Certain learned behaviors can be passed down through families and in fact by different populations or ethnic groups at the same time as blood groups are inherited, so by pure coincidence due to specific personality traits of population groups, both blood type and these traits may track together. In this case, the two would be correlated with each other, but there's no evidence that one will cause the other.

The other way blood groups could possibly follow inherited personality traits is if the genes are inherited together on the chromosome, and this is more likely to happen if the genes are closer in proximity on the chromosome, thus having less chance of being separated during the stages of crossing over. During myosis, the blood group gene is on the long arm of chromosome nine. Interestingly, a genetic mutation making one

more susceptible to a certain type of dementia. C nine O r F seventy two is also on chromosome nine, albeit on the other end of the chromosome, thus requiring an even number of crossings over to allow them to be inherited together. This form of dementia can cause behavioral variations which may cause personality changes decades before the dementia

sets in. Finally, in regards to the comment about personality being related to the gut microbiome, uh, and this was when we were talking about the plausibility of the thing. We didn't think that that the blood type predictor of personality was very plausible, but we did say there's a surface level kind of plausibility because you know, things about the gut microbiome can predict personality, at least potentially. Uh So, so, Uh, it might seem to people why couldn't the blood predicted

as well? Uh? But any continues about the gut microbiome. This is much more feasible since the biota in the gut produced neurotransmitters which can affect mood and personality, and the stems from in reology, when the gut and spinal cord were in fact one organ called the neural crest. The neural crest separates early during development, but the resulting gut and central nervous system are still closely linked during life, as can be seen when we get gut reactions to

certain brain stimuli. And we are now starting to see evidence of how the types of foods we eat affect the gut microbiome, which in turn can affect our mood and general state of mind. Looking forward to continuing to having my mind blown by you all the best, Annie, Well, it was great to have a geneticist and neuroscientists chime in on that. Oh yeah, I always love when when

you'll let their share your expertise with us. All right, On that note, I think we should probably take our first break, but when we come back, we will turn flesh into salt. Thank thank Alright, we're back all right now. This next message concerned some episodes that came before Halloween, but since it also touches on some Halloween e stuff,

I think we're throwing it in with Halloween. Lat Yeah, but plus the non Halloween episodes that they touched on are also at least a little bit HALLOWEENI I mean, you know how it goes. But this listener has written in before and always sends great messages. This is from Jesser. Jesse writes, Hey, guys, I wanted to write in to share some thoughts on some recent episodes, along with a little bit of monster history since it's getting close to October.

In the Flesh into Salt episodes, you talked about how Lot's wife might have been inspired by natural formations, But what could have been the inspiration for the story of Sodom and go Mora as a whole. While I'm not a scholar of the Hebrew Bible, I have a theory it's a bit of Bronze Age sci fi, going off of Isaac Asimov's definition of sci fi as stories which

deal with human response to new technology. Maybe Sodom and Gomorrah is a pastoral culture's idea of city has gone too far, where urbanization has destroyed the custom of hospitality. If you start looking at Hebrew Bible stories through this lens, the Tower of Babble Become is a cautionary tale about monumental buildings, Shadrack Mishak and a Ben to Go a story about smelting furnaces taken too far, and Joseph interpreting the Pharaoh's dreams at parable about the importance of storing

surplus grain. These stories would have entered the oral tradition when these ideas were still new then preserved when written down as religious text. This is all speculation, but ancient people's could have expressed their anxieties about new technologies through stories the same way we do today. I love this idea. I mean again, this is it's speculative. You can't like know this is the case, really, but you could look

for clues in this and the stories. Maybe. I I like the idea that a lot of Bible stories and traditional myths might in fact be like three thousand year old episodes of Black Mirror. Yeah. I mean, what do we know about about the way we think about the passage of time. We know that, yes, we are always anxious about new technologies as they have presented. Uh, the older generation is always suspicious of the younger generation and or fearful of them. We know that technology has profound

effects on culture, that changes culture constantly. Yeah. So I mean this, You know, on on the surface, this sounds very plausible. And now I don't know to what extend. Anyone has ever explored the concept of certainly of of mythology and folklore as as sort of primitive science fiction or prescience fiction sci fi. But I would be interested

to learn more about about how this might work. This sounds like this could be a fascinating book, and if it hasn't already been written, alright, so um Jesser continues quote, I also have a thought about a part of what makes the vantage Mind manuscripts so alluring. It's the fact that it's so mundane. You expect a hoax or an invention to be more flamboyant, to call more attention to itself. But as strange as the manuscript is, it doesn't go anywhere.

In fact, it seems to get less interesting towards the end, where you'd expect some sort of punchline or absurd conclusion. This is This is a great point. I think this is one of the reasons that um House of Leaves is so so convincing at times, because I had that experience where I felt that it towards the end it gets more just reference referential, you know, and and perhaps less engaging, but in a way that makes it more it feels more authentic in that regard. Yeah, totally, they continue.

The Codex Serafinitus makes a good comparison because it's much more obviously playful and fantastic you don't have to decipher its text to understand the point. But because the Vontage Manuscript appears to be so straightforward and serious about its subject, people assume there must be some meaning behind it. The idea that it might mean nothing is existentially unsatisfying. I can totally see this. Yeah. The and the Codex Serafinitus

is a good point in comparison. We brought it up in the Bondage Manuscript episode because it is something that we know was intentionally created as like an art project. It doesn't actually have a meaning, is just there to

be interesting and be you know, fun. Yeah. And in case in point, there are multiple pages of in it that you would potentially like frame on the wall, you know, I mean, it looks like a work of art, whereas the Vonish manuscript and not every page is really like that interesting without knowing what it is or in fact

what it is not. Yeah, And a lot of the more interesting pages come like, I don't know, two fifths of the way through, Like it's in the like balneological sections, the stuff with the weird baths and the like tentacle pipes and stuff that that's where things get really weird. And then after that it descends more into like I think, after that it's like astrology, and then you get the recipes towards the end, which is by far the least

interesting part. Yeah, whenever you're reading a story, especially if you're watching a movie that that has a like a dark book that shows up a strange book, generally it looks like they can just turn to any page and it's instantly monstrous or weird or you know, Eldric and so forth. Though, but uh, you know, I like the idea that a true mystery book would only its mysteries, would only present themselves if you you knew what you're

looking for, you know. So yeah, I would take this as at least a little bit of evidence more to the side that it does have a real meaning, because it gets less interesting as it goes on. You'd expect if it were a hoax, that would be structured to have more of a climax of weirdness. Absolutely so, Jesser continues, Uh, they make a future episode suggestion regarding uh created languages and so forth, which I think could be interesting. Uh,

and then there's this quote. Lastly, I wanted to toss in some Halloween history about which is we all know the stereotype of which is as older women wearing pointy hats during bubbling cauldrons, flying on brooms, and hanging out with cats. Where did this come from? It all goes back to beer beer all right, let's hear hear all about it. In fourteenth and fifteenth century Europe, brewing beer was considered a woman's job, part of keeping the house.

Being a beer beer brewer was one of the few professions acceptable for older married women to have, and when the witch craze began, these women were the most targeted demographic, both for social reasons seen as being jealous of women who were married and had children, and and economic reasons lacking the resources of a father's or husband's family to protect them. The traditional brewers hat was tall and pointed with a wide brim, like an anvil for a blacksmith.

The traditional symbol of a brewer was the broom. Brewers kept cats as mousers to protect their stores of grain, and brewing beer does involve some stirring of bubbling cauldrons. Illustrations of typical witches had all of these traits, and people at the time would understand as signifying beer brewers. Over time, the cultural context was lost, but the signifiers remained, leaving us with the modern image of the witch. Thanks for all the work you do in making my favorite

poly math podcast I have. I've done some reading about which is before I haven't even run across this beer brewer argument. Yeah, I don't know what I think. Like, I like the case you make here. I feel like I'd have to do the research and check all this for myself. But I'm definitely intrigued, Yes, sir, I mean it. It does sound concise in a way that tends to make me suspicious of of anything that's explaining a cultural

motif for a mythical monster. But I mean, I'm I'm open to the idea that perhaps this is at least part of the story. I mean, I definitely have read about beer brewing in the medieval or Renaissance period being primarily the work of women. Um, I think that is true about these specific things like the symbol of the broom and the hat and all that. I'd have to check that out, but yeah, I'm intrigued. Yeah, I mean, the broom was already going to be a domestic symbol

um anyway, and the hat, I don't know. You know, the hat is maybe an area of the witch motif that I haven't looked at a lot. Uh. It seems like things that i've I've read have dealt more with the broom. But thanks as always, jes He. This next one comes from Billy. This is just general Halloween male and concerns cryptids. Billy writes, Hi, this never really took off, but earlier in the year, I made a Twitter bot that generates random descriptions of cryptids every few hours. You're

speaking our language, Billy. It draws on banks of existing animals, bits of anatomy, adjectives, and a few other variables to produce unique and entertaining descriptions. You can find it at twitter dot com slash Cryptid Factory. Here's one of my favorites. Lord Alfress of Sweden has a tortoise and a glipto. Don's delightful inverted front portion, no rear, and the body of a marlin the size of an eraser. I'd love to know if this brings you any joy. Thanks Billy. Uh, Yeah,

I I like this idea. I think this is what Twitter is good for, is making bots like this. Yeah, I mean, I'm always for any you know, listing of mythical creatures and descriptions of their you know, their physical characteristics. So I'm all in this, springs me joy. I just looked up some of the most recent tweets, says of the moment we're recording this. Here's one picture the widened head of a camel spider, but also an ammonite's bosom,

commonly seen dragging herself past the undersides of leaves. Not bad. One more, she has a shrimps select flavor, the head of an evil mouse, a polar bear's waist, and the back sections of just a couple of lynx is once seen slithering toward carpets. The fluff of a gerbil will sporadically also feature. You know that this reminds me of are these these children's books? There was one that I had when I was a kid, and there's a a newer book that has the same concept that I also love,

as I think far superior art. But each page is a different creature, and each page has also been cut into three sections so that you can flip and match and mismatch the different parts of a creature's body. And then at least some versions of this design also include text that does the same thing, so you can you can just go straight through the book and get this monster, than this monster, than this monster, or you can mix and match and create, you know, a wider variety of

strange hybrids. I love this. I've had this book as a kid, and I wish I could remember the name of the at least the newer because there's a really beautiful new book that has the same concept the one I had as a kid, which I also I haven't I literally have not seen since my childhood, had more cartoonish art. But still I remember being really captivated by it because there were all these different possibilities within it, And really that gets to the heart of so much

monster creation. It is the hybridity of the of the thing. It is the bringing together these different forms. All right, here's another bit of a listener mail, and this one comes to us from Adam, related to our anthology of horror episodes, especially the most recent installments. So last year we did volume one. This year we did volume two and three. So Adam says, Dear Robert and Joe, I find myself writing to you a lot lately. I think it means that you've been hit ting on some especially

engaging topics for me. I wanted to write this email in response to the recent anthology of horror episode in which you discussed shadow play. This was an episode of The Twilight Zone, right. This was the one about the guy who claimed he was dreaming everyone around him and if they sent him to the electric chair as he had been sentenced to, they would all disappear because he

had stopped dreaming. So Adam continues. Uh discussed shadow play, metaphysical solop sism, and the idea that separate consciousnesses may exist in the form of other characters within our dreams. I have something resembling firsthand experience in this matter, and it was terrifying. Some of the details are hazy, as it happened in a dream about three years ago. Thankfully, I wrote an account soon after that that I was

able to refer to. I have not engaged in lucid dreaming in some time, but I used to practice it, and I've experienced it to varying degrees of success. One night, I became lucid in a dream where I was in a crowded room with a close friend who I will call Ben. I was very excited and decided to tell Ben, this is all a dream and you're a character in

my dream. At first, Ben was dismissive, saying that there was no way he was a dream, and so forth, very similar to many of the characters in shadow play. This is the point where I wish that I had decided to use my lucidity for something else, but unfortunately I decided to try to convince Ben that it was a dream. He did not take kindly to it. In an instant, all the other people in the room with us turned in unison to face me and stared with

expressionless faces. I somehow knew they had all become some kind of hive mind with Ben as their leader. Ben's demeanor then shifted from neutral and carefree to sinister and hostile. It wasn't just his physical demeanor, but I felt as if his negative energy was filling the room. Although I was lucid, I got the impression that it was he who was in control of the dream. He then began

to attack me verbally. He talked about a painful rejection that I had recently experienced, played on some insecurities that I had been experiencing, and told me secrets that I have never told anyone. Then he stopped, gave me a menacing grin, and said, that's right, I know everything about you. At that moment, the crowd moved in unison towards me with angry faces, and I awoke with a fright. I took a while to get back to sleep, and thankfully, when I did it, Ben was not waiting for me.

A few days later, I posted this story to the subreddit Lucid Dreaming, and someone in the comments suggested that that this may have been the non dominant hemisphere of my brain trying to communicate with the dominant hemisphere. I don't know if this is the case, but I fully believe that during the interaction there were two separate consciousnesses existing in my dreaming mind, and one of them, Ben

was hostile toward the other me. Regardless of the explanation, I would not recommend trying to confront sollop si um by telling people they don't exist, even if it's true. Uh uh. It would have been far better to keep that knowledge to myself far away out of a lucid adventure. Best regards Adam Well, I don't know, uh, I don't know if I can back up that explanation of it

being the non dominant hemisphere. But that is one of the most horrifying dreams I've ever heard of, because it's sort of it has implications that go beyond the dream, right, It's like one of the few cases where you could imagine a dream actually representing some threat that persists after

the dream is over. Yeah. And then interesting too that like that basically lucidity has been introduced to a certain extent within the dream, but then there's still you know that the dream characters still have weight, and still have have power, and seem to have even uh, you know, some state of a mind of their own, which is

uh yeah, which is interesting and potentially terrifying. Here's the question I wonder, Adam, why you thought that Ben was conscious and not just like a hostile agent that you were imagining in your dream as you would often imagine the hostile agent. I mean, we imagine hostile agents in our dreams all the times, things chasing us and and all this. I introduced the possibility in that episode that these other agents we imagine could in some sense be conscious,

because our minds are possible of anxiousness. You know, we're imagining them. So maybe the brain is using some sort of its consciousness potential in these separate simulated agents that it creates, but there's no way there's like, while I can't rule out that possibility, I don't know of strong evidence that that's the case. But then it comes back to what we were discussing too. You could say, well,

this is this doesn't mean be was conscious. This just means that you, you're sleeping self was engaging in some level of theory of mind. But as we discussed what a theory of mind is creating some you know, semi like low resolution conscious model of what we think another person is thinking. Yeah, again, it's like, it's hard to rule that out as far as we know. But but I don't know of any strong evidence that indicates it.

But you seem to think that's the case. Maybe it's just because if a if another agent that we imagine in a dream or something is frightening and lucid and real enough, and especially in this case, because it knows it, it proclaims to know everything about you. Uh, maybe that just naturally leads us to think it's conscious, kind of the same way that we start to think robots are conscious.

If they're sufficiently humanoid. Does that make sense? Yes? But Adam, if you if you have other reasons for thinking that this been in your mind was actually a separate, truly conscious entity, I would be interested in hearing what your reasons are for thinking that. All right, here's another quick one. This one comes to us from d D says love the episode one bit of Barry Nelson trivia. Barry Barry Nelson, to remind everybody, was the the actor who played the

character Ulman in Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. When did Barry Nelson come up in the anthology episode? He was in the episode of Monsters Far Below, So he played the lead in that that episode. This is the and this is the one where he's you know, fighting the Googles

and so forth. But he was a longstanding TV and film actor who is probably most famous for being in The Shining in that scene where he's a Jack Nicholson's characters there for a job interviet And in the moment I accidentally confused him with Barry Sullivan, who was in Planet of the Vampire. Yes, yeah, So anyway, h D

shares this one bit of Barry Nelson trivia. He was the first actor to play James Bond and an adaptation of Casino Royal, which was an episode of that of a nineteen fifties TV show called Climax, which was also an anthology. I've never seen that, so this apparently even pre dates the Was it Peter Sellers who played James Bond and like a farcical adaptation of Casino Royal before

they made dr No, Yeah he did. I went ahead and look this up just to make sure, and sure enough, Barry Nelson played James Bond and guess who played the villain? I don't know, Peter Lorii, Peter Nice. Yes, So I kind of want to come back and check this out. This would be in nicing to say I've never seen this, but I'm obviously I'm a fan of the two leads there. I love that I can get a Peter Laurie and

Christopher Lambert out of the same impression. It's basically the same voice that only just the face is more handsome

in the French model. When I also wanted to share something that didn't come in as an email but was shared on the Stuff to Blow your Mind Facebook discussion module by a listener who I don't since this discussion module, I don't know if she'd want to be named or not, so I'll just leave her name off for now, um, since we didn't discuss that ahead of time, But but I wanted to share because she had some interesting feedback.

She said, just listen to the Anthology of Horror, Part two, episode and I have some comments on the discussion you had at the end about multiple consciousness is in one mind as someone with dissociative identity disorder, This is exactly what is going on for me, or at least the only way I can describe it. It isn't a far out speculation. It's my lived experience and I don't have any communication with the other parts, but other people do.

And my parts leave clues like notes or cuts or leftovers of food I never would have wanted to eat. Each of these parts is in a way, a separate consciousness, with its own reaction to events, own memories, and even own favorite pizza topping. And your mini Carl Sagan simulation would be what is known as an introject an alter a part that exists in you and has its own experiences, but is based on something in the outside world that seemed to possess enough of the traits needed for survival

that the mind created it. Wow. I obviously may not have everything right here, and I'm not speaking for anyone except me, and I'm in no way speaking of the experiences of other people with d I D or similar. It just seemed odd you didn't bring this up in your discussion. This was a really great point, and UH, I actually had a back and forth with UH with

this listener on the subject. The main difference, UH, the dissociative identity disorder didn't come up when I was thinking about this is we were considering if it's possible for the mind to simultaneously have more than one consciousness existing,

like in your dream. Could it be possible that both you with your regular mind, your you know, your primary mind are conscio us in the dream, And then also the brain is generating some separate conscious entity, maybe a kind of like less conscious or lower resolution conscious entity, at the same time, and then so there could be like two minds generated by the same brain simultaneously. Yeah. I mean, for starters, I think that if we were we would want to give a like a full proper

deep dive into into this UH topic. If we were to to to discuss h discussed in the future. But this also reminds me once again. Blindside, the novel by Peter Watts, has a character in it that has multiple personalities as I recall where they've through some level of I can't remember that had been partially engineered or not.

But are you remembering this? Yeah, I seem to recall that it was a person who had been uh, you know, in this sci fi scenario, had been had had this done intentionally for some kind of reason, like like maybe having different kinds of expertise in the rain. Yeah, that sounds right. Yeah, uh And and I just wanted to say also in the responses that the same listener says, uh that I know there's such thing as d I D with altars being co conscious, but but they haven't

personally experienced it. And so I think this is worth revisiting in a future show. Yeah, I think so too. By the way, Tiny Carl Sagan. In my brain, I've tried to imagine what it's favorite pizza would be, and it's it's definitely Hawaiian pizza. It's definitely ham and pineapple. I don't know why I have nothing to back that up. With but for some reason that seems right. And as for the tiny Terence McKenna, can you guess what his favorite topping is. Oh, it's gotta be a root pesto.

I know, I know what you're gonna be mushrooms. Of course, it's obviously mushrooms. But I don't know. That's a That's an interesting that like that in of itself is an interesting question though, because, especially with the Carl Sagan one, it's like, to a certain extent, I do have this kind of like tiny, you know, conception of who the character is and what they like, even if I've never stopped for a second to wonder what kind of pizza the real life Carl Sagan preferred, or if he ever

spoke about it. What do you want to read this message from Jim in New Jersey? Yes, absolutely all right. This one comes to us from Jim and they write, I have another TV show about dreams and reality. It was the two thousand twelve limited series NBC show Awake. Jason Isaacs. Jason Isaacs Always Traffic portrays the police detective Michael Britton. The show begins with Brittain and his teenage son grieving the death of their wife mother in a

car accident that involved the entire family. The next morning, Britain awakens and finds his wife repainting the house to occupy her to help with her grief and the death of their son in the same accident. Brittain is living two contradictory realities. Each morning, when he awakes, his day flips to the other reality. One is where his son survived the accident, and one is where his wife does. He has a police department psychologist assigned in each reality.

He tells each of his duality, and both assure him that his other reality is the dream, but they can't really prove it. Each assumes his vivid dream is some form of denial. Beatie Wong does a fantastic job as one of the psychologists, But then again, Wong does a fantastic job in every performance. To me, he'll always be Henry Wu Yeah, alright, anyway, Jim continues. It was an

entertaining series, but not super sophisticated. Each reality had a different color palette, making it easier to keep track of where Britain was. The show does reveal which reality is which by the end, sort of as for the Twilight series, episode wouldn't the people in a dream disappear when the dreamer wakes up, whether electrocuted or just awakening. Normally, I think that, of course would be the case, But I don't know that. It's like Twilight Zone logic, right, Yeah,

you got to emphasize the most dramatic elements. As for our Descartes argument that we can't try star senses and the only thing we can depend upon is their own reasoning. I'm even starting to doubt that you've discussed consciousness before. Where does it exist? The brain is made up of neurons, which don't do much individually. When the number of firing input synapses crosses the threshold, the neuron triggers its outmost synaps, triggering other synapses. The brain is not much more than

a massively complex adding machine. Maybe the Carts would have been more correct and stating I think therefore I some or in Latin uh coquito orgo am. Even though I can definitely perceive my consciousness, I sometimes wonder if it's just a behavior that emerges from all of these neurons firing uh ps. I wish I could take credit for the some am flip in the Decards quote it's from

godal escher Bach by Douglas Hofstadter. Okay, going back to the to the dream thing, how he's saying, you know, whether whenever he wakes up, the people will disappear, whether he's electrocuted or not. Uh, maybe it's just grant that the main guy in the episode being selfish and saying he doesn't want to be electrocuted, and that's the reason he's telling people. He wouldn't bother telling them. Also, if you just let me hang out here for a while,

eventually I'll wake up and you'll all disappear. As for consciousness being an emergent phenomenon of enough neurons firing, I mean, I think I think that's one of the standard models that people propose. So yeah, I think that's that's entirely plausible. I'm very interested by this NBC show That Awake. I may have to go revisiting it. I haven't seen it came one. Maybe it came out a little before it's time.

It's sounding like, yeah, alright, on that note, we're going to take one more break and then we'll be right back. Thank you, thank you, Alright, We're back, all right. This next email being burned onto a tortilla for us. Here comes from our listener Rowan, and just a warning if if you've got kids listening or something. This one mentions

the use of psychedelics. Dear Robert and Joe. I've been meaning to sit down and write to you for a while now, but after your recent episode on driving and your Brain, I felt like I had to get on it. This was one of the ones we did in October. We sort of talked about Christine, we talked about the

psychological effects of driving. Rowan rights, I drive for nine to ten hours a day, and your show was the first one I found when I was introduced to podcasts about three years ago, and you've been on my drive playlist ever since. Oh well, very happy to be there. First off, I want to thank you for the work

you do. You guys are incredibly educational and inspiring. Your episode on urban evolution, probably two years ago at this point, is the reason I decided to pick my degree back up and graduate, and is the reason I plan on declaring a major in forestry and a minor in urban planning. Great to hear. I love hearing stuff like that. Warms my heart. Rowan continues in your Driving episode, you talk about tool use and how it can alter our perception

of distance and size. Anecdotally, I've definitely noticed this in an odd way. I drive a large cargo van at work and have a rather small personal car that I rarely drive, as I walk most everywhere. On the times that I do drive, my brain assumes that I'm in my van, as in I see my car as being much larger. The roadways feel smaller than, say, after a vacation where I am away from the van for long periods. Imagine if you will watching someone parallel park a Corolla

as if it were a box truck. That that also sounds like a great rod Sterling rod Sterling introduction to Twilight zentner Ni Gallery. Imagine if you will watching someone parallel park a Corolla as if it were a box truck. It couldn't happen, but it could the Twilight Zone. Okay, on with the Mail. Another of your episodes that I feel I should write in about is your show on

the split Brain. I have damage to the left hemisphere of my brain from what my doctor described as a stroke in the third trimester of pregnancy, which interrupted the development of the right side of my body and caused he like patches of no activity on my m R eyes. For a long time, I really only considered how this

damage had affected me in a physical way. Listening to your episodes along with one other shout out to you are not so smart if for some reason you need a new podcast, really got me thinking about how it would have affected my cognitive function. There is a feeling I have at times when I am struggling to find a word, listen to an explanation someone is giving, or

think through a problem to try to explain it. It feels like the thought is hitting a blockage, similar to the feeling of having something on the tip of your tongue, but slightly different. It's not that I'm trying to remember something, more that I've already remembered it, but I can't say it. I suffer from fairly persistent depression and anxiety. However, I often feel the physical effects of them and am unable

to identify the source or even the emotion itself. At times, it feels as if my brain gets stuck when trying to figure out the reaction my body is having, an doesn't quite get to communicating it with my conscious self. If that makes sense. Okay, interesting. I mean I think some of that just matches up with just normal cognition, or at least what my brain assumes his normal cognition. But other aspects of that might be you know, singular

to this condition. Yeah, we did an episode on the tip of the tongue phenomenon not too long ago, and if you've been listening for three years you probably heard that one. Then really knows And I guess this next comment comes in response to the fact that we did that psychedelic series. The last thing I wanted to mention in this long winded email is that, well, I did LSD a while back, and it was a hoot. Some friends and I spent the day in the yard with

our dog and had a wonderful time. The one major thing I remember was feeling a connectedness to people I was with. If you can imagine the feeling of the way trees in a forest are connected through microrizal networks as or my corpisal. I'm not sure how you pronounced that. Yeah, I think we've touched we I can't remember if we've touched on. Sorry, just keep meaning to touch on this more.

I think it came up a little bit in the mushrooms. Uh, in the Psychedelics episodes, the uh, you know, the the fungal networks to connect these trees and the and some of the some really interesting work going into too, looking at this sort of communication that occurs, and we can come back and go deep on that sometime. But finally, Rowan rights, As I'm writing this, I'm also starting to get curious as to how hemispheric brain damage would alter

a psychedelic experience. Huh, yeah, I don't know anything about that. Yeah, I don't. I don't think that I've seen that question asked before. I would be surprised if there's not some kind of ongoing research about that. Yeah, because as we discussed like split brains were you know, or anytime you have a brain that has, you know, suffered damage of some sort asymmetrically affected. Yeah, like that's going to be very useful to looking at some sort of a neurological questions.

So yeah, it stands to reason somebody has at least considered that. But uh, yeah, well it was great to hear from rolling on all of this. Now, this first time I've heard someone say Alice d was a hoot. Um I feel like most people would would maybe describe it a little differently, but but fair enough. It's all very subjective, all right. So let's move on to feedback

on another episode, our episode on the Garrison Swine. Uh this was this is a really fun episode because it had it had demons in it, it had pigs in it. We got to donibal tool, use animal tool, use pig cognition, Bible stories, the whole nine yards. Uh. So, first, here's a short bit of listener mail. This one comes to us from Chris, Robert and Joe. I listened to Stuff to Blew Your Mind pretty much every week, probably my favorite podcast. While listening to this episode, I was thinking

a couple of things. Firstly, I don't remember you ever mentioning sea otters as animals that use tools. They're the only marine animals to use stone tools. Add in that their treacherous necrophiliac I don't know anything about that. Well, did you and Christian talk about that in your necrophilia episode? Might well have? Yeah. If if you want to hear more about necrophilia, check out that episode that Christian and I did a few years back. It's a it's a

good one. It ultimately demystifies necrophilia deals. I think we get into human necrophilia a little bit, but we spent a lot of time talking about animal necrophilia, which, of course it is like the primary place you go to understand what this thing is before you get into human complications. But then Chris continues to talk about the pigs we discussed in that episode. Yeah, they write then during your discussion on vision wardy pigs using tools and then not

being very effective. Perhaps the use of tools is a signal that they're building a nest versus rooting around for food. Thanks for all the great shows, Chris. I think this

is an interesting possibility. So one of the questions we had was this research into the pigs found that the pigs using the like bark and sticks to dig in the ground to make nests did seem to fit the formal criteria for tool use, but it didn't seem like they were much more efficient or at least in all cases more efficient at nest building when using the tools than they were when they were just digging with their

hoofs or snouts. So the question is, why are they using the tools then if it doesn't necessarily give them an advantage, like help them build a nest faster. One thing that I offered is, well, what if the parts of their bodies they normally dig with just get sore from doing it or something That's that's possibility. One of the things the authors brought up is that it could just be a a social convention, almost sort of like pig culture. Uh. And then that would, I think line

up kind of with what Chris is talking about here. Well, yeah, I think I think the idea here is that, if I'm understanding Chris correctly, the ideas that picking up a tool to start digging shows the other pigs that it's time to build a nest instead of just the other pigs rooting around like you normally would when you're looking for food, right, I mean, you could almost be interpreted. I guess it's kind of like a like a fitness display.

I'm reminded of these documentaries in which you see birds male birds building you know, some sort of mating structure you know, uh, that is just about attracting the females. Now, obviously this would not be exactly the same thing. But perhaps the the idea I think that Chris is getting at is that the use of the tool could be part of of the city. The overall signaling saying that

I I am building the nest. Now, yeah, and and but but tends to I think start with the females and the pigs, and that they share the behaviors with like they sort of teach the males how to do it. It suggests to me that if that is in fact what's going on, it could be that it's it's almost like ringing the whistle. It's it's time to start work. Because the nest building was a social thing. It was like more than one pig participated in the digging of

the nest interest. So it's like maybe maybe picking up the bark and doing that gets the other pigs on task. Possibility. Yeah, all right, well, now we're going to jump into another longer email about the Garascene demoniac. Uh. This one's long enough in fact, that I'm going to tag out to you during the reading of this email. All right, this one comes to us from Sean, Hi, Joe, and Robert.

I'm a longtime listener and occasionally right in my last email that you read out in a listener Maile episode was also from Halloween last year, something about Halloween that makes me want to write in I feel you. I just finished listening to your episode on the Garascene Demoniac, which was a fascinating Bible story that I hadn't heard of before. You also covered lots of points that I'd like to reply to, especially adding input from the other

side of the world. I live in Indonesia. The very first thing I thought of while listening was a story from Bali from a few years ago. This story is a massive w t F from the start and gets so much wilder by the end. A teenage boy was caught having sex with a cow and a village in the west of Bali. As this act spiritually defiled the village and the boy. A wedding ceremony was then held between the boy and the cow. Both were dressed up

in customary wedding attire. To complete the spiritual cleansing of the village, the cow was drowned in the sea. The here is the earliest report in English I could find after a quick Google, and he points to a Metro dot Co dot UK story. Man forced to marry cal faints at wedding, which, uh, you know, it sounds like a you know, a goofier headline than like the true story. I feel like we're we're absorbing from this telling. Uh. They continue, while a different animal and involving bsality, the

stories are somewhat similar. They both involve possession of demons or bad spirits, they both involve ceremony including animals, and they are both concluded with animals dying before the case being declared closed. The Balanese religion, while called Hindu, is not very similar to the Indian Hinduism, where cows are revered, and incorporates a lot more animous beliefs and the ever

presence of good and bad spirits. While there might not be a take home message from this story, it certainly is fascinating and quite a unique insight into a unique culture. Another part of this episode appealing to me. As you talked about religious taboos, particularly the eating of pork, I should start by saying, I am a Muslim. I wasn't born into Islam, but I converted three years ago, so I have experienced growing up in an English culture and

living a pork free lifestyle. It seems to me that while once you pointed out, there may have been initially very good reasons to ban the eating of pork, such as the reasons you mentioned the fact that the fact that pork flesh is a host for parasitic worms and more modern farming and food preparation would deem these reasons unimportant. Your reason that pigs are indiscriminate eaters and omnivorous makes a lot of sense, as it is also forbidden to

eat animals with things I eat carnivores. Another, however, the reason given by the Koran, to my knowledge, but please don't take my word of love own, is that the flesh is dirty. I believe you were right in saying that it is mostly taken nowadays to be a signal it is not necessary a sacrifice for any Muslims who have never even tried pork, but is definitely seen as a we don't do this, the people who aren't in

our group do situation. I would like to add here that that pork is not forbidden if there is no other food source available. I should also mention that even among the Balinese who are known lovers of pork, there was really there's recently been some suspicion as there have been a few cases of people becoming infected by bacteria and undercooked meat that reportedly lead to meningitis. Personally, I think the idea that we follow this rule because nonbelievers

do the opposite is not a particularly strong argument. It affects me personally, as I have two dogs at home and in Islam this is not the done thing. But the more I try to find out why, it seems like the reason is because nonbelievers have dogs and we are not nonbelievers. This brings me to my response to Gustine's view of animal rights based on his reading of the scripture. All Right, I'm gonna tag out now, Joe. All Right, Sean goes on. Like I said, many Muslims

would not have a dog. In some cases, there's a strong dislike, hatred, or even abuse of dogs as a result. I am, however, adamant that this is not stemming from a reading of the Quran or other religious laws, but from cultural upbringing. In the Koran, one of three mentions of dogs is that you may eat food hunted by your dog. Another mention is of a dog who accompanied a group of pious believers and protected them as they

slept in a cave while fleeing persecution. I used to work for an animal welfare organization here in Bali, for part of which I tried to develop a curriculum that incorporated animal welfare. So I look for religious stories or texts that would promote animal welfare to children. While Islam promotes eating meat and the general idea of humanity is above animals, I feel there's nothing in the text that would call for the abuse of animals. In fact, the

opposite is true. It is forbidden to spend money on dogs, gamble on animals. It is encouraged to give water and food to thirsty and hungry dogs. It's forbidden to slaughter a younger animal. There is one story in which Mohammad said angels do not visit a house which has a dog, and this seems to be the only negative there is. Of course, the doctrine of a dog's saliva is impure and must be cleaned, but this is alleviated by the

simple process of cleaning. However, I feel that cultural leanings have gone the way of Augustine, taking one story that dogs hinder angels from entering a house and one idea of impurity about dogs saliva, and using this as an excuse to neglect or abuse animals. I know you focus mainly on Christianity and animal rights, but I feel this reflects the same ideas to summarize cleansing. Ceremonies involving bad spirits and animals forced to their deaths are still a thing.

Pork is probably okay to eat if sourced well and cooked right, but nowadays is a cultural signal. And like Augustine, many people nowadays take one passage from scripture and use it to allow themselves to treat others poorly, ignoring the wealth of s pure pointing in the other direction. I'm very sorry for the long message. I'm quite surprised I had so much to say about a demonic pig exorcism. But I hope there are some parts you can take away from my email to entertain you or bring to

lights some views from different cultures. And as always, I love the show and look forward to whatever adventure you take me on next. All the best, Sean, No, absolutely, I I I've really appreciated Sean's inside on this um and and you know, I think it also shows that you know how interesting this topic was, that you know what, on the surface is just kind of a wtf uh you know story from the New testament ultimately touches on so many different aspects of human culture and human behavior. Yeah.

I mean, one of the things Sean brings up, which I think is true, is that the element of the pigs running in the into the sea to die afterwards. That could reflect, I don't know, not something about the peculiarities of that story itself, but could be a deeper sort of motif of like the scapegoat tradition, right, you know, putting sends her uncleanness into an animal that is then sent out into the wilderness to its death or is put to death or something as a way of uh,

sort of like transferring the bad stuff out. So so I can totally see it fitting with that tradition that, like as Sean says, is still used in many ways today. Yeah. I mean we didn't even talk about scapegoats in that episode. Yeah. Yeah, So clearly we could come back and do more in the future. All Right, we're getting towards the end here, but we have two more bits of Halloween listener mail that Carney is insisting that we read because if we don't, it might have to go back into the pit until

next year. So this one comes to us from Um, this is Carrie, I believe, and Carrie rides high. Thanks for a great show. I just listened to your show about Jenny green Teeth. This was an episode from the previous year, but when we ran it vault episode about Jenny Green Teeth which ended with a recommendation about the

Hitcher and his scary song about eels Um. The Hitcher is of course a character from the British comedy series The Mighty Bush, which I think at this point has been off the air for like an amazingly long period of time, and in age where Netflix and other streaming shows are bringing back everything, I'm a little surprised nobody has has has given us a Boush revival. But for fans of the Great British Bake Off, I don't know

if you've seen it. Null Fielding is a yeah, he's the host, right, yeah, one of them, Yeah, I mean both both the Julian as well. They've both continued to work a lot and you can certainly find them out there. They just aside from some live stuff, they haven't they haven't fully come back to the Bush. Rachel and I make a lot of baking show jokes about just baking a little foxy Mariam. Alright, anyway, so Carrie continues. It made me think about a book I just finished called

The Gospel of the Eels by Patrick Vincent. There is a chapter in the book about the eel as a creepy and scary being which has haunted us in numerous way. It has almost crept into our subconscious and could be claimed to have made Sigmund Freud come up with his psychoanalysis, since he, as a young scientist, could not find its genitals hidden and not possible to directly observe with scientific methods.

Well later it was naturally found. The way this was done also makes up a very intriguing story, and Freud had just been studying the wrong metamorphos stage of the eel like that. I've never heard that before. I thought this could be an interesting October episode, or if you do not have the time for the for the moment, something inspiring for a later occasion. Below is a link to review of the book. Thank you for a great show,

Keep up the good work. Uh you know I would I would be up for an episode on eels and our humans relationship with eels. I've I've always found them fascinating. Um I got to see one while snorkeling recently and that was a lot of fun. Freud in the elusive genital sell me on it. So yeah, yeah, yeah, And if if Royd has something to say about them, than than clearly there's some meat on the bone there. All right, we have one last listener mail, would you do the honors?

Joe Sure? This is in response to another Vault episode we released in October, or the one about monstrosity and cuteness. Why so many monsters, especially like Japanese Yokai, I believe, end up with these very popular cute versions of them that exist all throughout culture. So uh land in rites in Hello guys. I wanted to respond to this episode in a few ways. First, I've never seen a cute or adorable version of Suron Saruman, the nas Gul, or

the Uricai. Maybe they exist, but I've never seen them anywhere. Well, hold on, there the whole there's the pop what is it? The pop? Funky pop, funk? What is it? I don't know what you're talking about. Funk pop. Seth has just chimed in the funk pop. Yeah, the little little little uh you know, dolls, little uh sculptures of different pop culture with the little pill heads. Yeah, I feel like there's a kind of cute looking Soron. I think I've

seen that somewhere. Okay, Uh, I mean it's weird because I feel like they would have to make its head very wide, and the whole point of Saron's head is that his head has verticality. It's a cathedral with the helmet, right, But I mean basically just a big head, small body, squat little cute form. It's granted, you can only make Soron so cute, and obviously there's nothing really you can do with the great all Seeing Eye incarnation, but I think I think it's been done. I think he's too

popular to not do up like that. I was a little appalled recently when I was at a bookstore with my son and we're looking at the Harry Potter stuff because it's Harry Potter obsessed and lo and behold, here are cute Voldemort's. There should not be cute Voldemort's Voldermore Voldemore is not cute in in any way, shape or form um. And yet we've we've made them, and I presumably people buy them. Oh, I don't know. I can go for a cute Sorromon. It almost writes itself. I'm

Sorromon of many colors, you know, all Landon continues. Second, it could the idea to make all these villains and monsters cute be related to making the hero more adorable, to think the Flintstone Kids, Muppet babies, and even the more recent travesty of Marvel Heroes babies. I don't know what that refers to. There's a whole lineup of these young children, young versions of characters. Maybe someone eventually said why not the monster slash villain too? I don't know.

Does does Muppet babies pre date the cute Yokai? I have no idea. Um m, I mean Muppet babies are an interesting point. I don't know. There's this. It's like as if the adult Muppets were not already cute and cuddly enough, right. I mean, I watched way too too much of the Muppet Babies. Um, but I can't say I loved it at the same time. Oh, I don't know. I feel like there is something going on there where. If you take something and you essentially turn it into

a Teddy Bear, there is something going on there. Where we're perhaps saying this means so much to me as an adult or as a you know, or at least a non child, that I can, I can and want to transform it into like a larval form, into a teddy bear form that I will been cling to now, and in doing so, I kind of like retroactively attach my childhood to it. Yeah, I see that. Or I mean maybe you did read Lord of the Rings when

you're a kid. I mean I I did, so you know, it's not that big of a stretch to like transform it into a teddy bear or a doll and then love it as an adult, to reconnect with the child that you were when you first explored this world. I mean, Lord of the Rings already has elements that are insufferably cute, Like the Hobbits are, like they're almost too cute to read about, you know. Yeah, that's true, But I guess that's part of what the contrast there that makes the

story work. So you've got the doomy darkness of the Great War and more Door and all that, and then you've got the Hobbits, which are so quaint as too, I don't know, make all that stuff the more powerful? Yeah, I mean and ultimately, I guess the idea is like the shire is what you're fighting for, right, Like the shire is that the thing that should be protected, all right,

Landing goes on. The other idea is based on the scripture in the Bible that speaks of Satan as transforming himself into an angel of light and Second Corinthians, chapter eleven, verse fourteen. That is to say, he makes bad things look good, which accounts for much in the world. If you ask me to think of the Japanese demons you spoke of, for example, people lived in fear of and acted and reacted for hundreds of years based on the

belief that these demons could harm them. Now that the world is more quote enlightened, people do not believe in demons as much. However, the demons still influence the lives of people. Even if this is a new concept. Satan has made danger seem safe. What do you guys think. I don't know if Landing means this literally or just sort of like as a way of I don't know.

It's a kind of a cultural pattern here. Well. In my experience growing up in um like a Baptist church, that whole line about Satan transforming himself in an angel of light was generally used to explain why you shouldn't like something that you like, or you shouldn't want something that you want. And of course there are things, yes, that any human may feel some desire for that it is advisable to be reminded that there may be some

pitfalls there to wanting that, you know. But on the other hand, there are plenty of things that are uh, just part of like normal human behavior or just part of of life. And it's easy for somebody to come along and say, Nope, don't go after that. It's just Satan in a disguise right there. Yeah. In my early conservative Christian environments, I remember that being deployed much along the same lines as uh, the idea that the Antichrist

will come in the name of peace. This was often cited basically against any politician or public figure who who was against war or who advocated peace in any kind of way. The idea was like, ah, that's a sign that they're bad. Yeah, so in wanting peace bad, glowing glowing with light also potentially bad. Finally, Lyndon says, thanks for all the good work. I love the episodes where you read some ancient text or story at the beginning.

You both have a perfect cadence. Ah, we'll think. I'm glad to hear that, because generally we just do it because it's fun. But it's always nice when people connect with the cold opens. All right, I think that does it for this year's Halloween stuff. Yes, that wasn't I'm sorry to say that wasn't all the mail we got. As we said, our mail bag is overflowing, our our cup runneth over, and we really appreciate all of the

great messages you send us. Sorry if your message didn't make it onto this episode, but uh, feel free to write us again in the future. Absolutely again. We're going to follow this up with another listener mail. That's going to be additional non Halloween listener mail. In the meantime, if you want to check out other episodes of Stuff to Blow your Mind, well you know where to find them. There's the website Stuff to Blow your Mind dot com.

You can also find Stuff to Blow your Mind wherever you get your podcasts, and just make sure you have subscribed and that you give us a nice rating if you If you like the show, that really helps us out. As for other projects, there's Invention, our Journey through human techno History. Do check that out. If you haven't given it a shot, you'll find that at invention pod dot com. You'll find it wherever you get your podcasts. That comes out once a week and it is a tremendous amount

of fun. We recently recorded an episode about the Uh the spit Dog, which is phenomenal. I think it's maybe one of the best episodes we we've recorded for Invention, and I really want to encourage everyone to check that out. And if you're in the mind for a little sci fi, some fiction, a little bit of horror this this season, you might want to check out the Second oil Age.

That's the fiction series that I was involved with, and it is I think at this point, as as of this recording, like six episodes out of ten or out. And if you if you were to wait till go ahead and subscribe, but you can wait till the end of the month, and then you'll have all ten ready to go, ready to binge. Seriously, folks, check out the Second oil Age. Delicious dark sci fi. I think you'll love it. If you like us, you'll love it all right. And that's all I got. How Can they email us?

Joe Oh, of course you can contact us as always. Wait first, I gotta give a shout out to our wonderful audio producer Seth Nicholas Johns. Of course, but you can email us as always at contact at stuff to Blow your Mind dot com. Stuff to Blow Your Mind is a production of iHeart Radio's How Stuff Works. For more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.