goethe constantly strove for this knowledge, knowledge not only of himself, but also of what is around him, and faust is absolutely, of course, not a medieval mystic, he is absolutely a character of the age of enlightenment, and there is also a very interesting quote, shortly before his death, when faust was already completed, sealed, goethe writes in a letter to humbaldt, here again, as for the sciences, an amazing letter, there are magnificent words, on everything that i created in faust, i threw clothes, so that everyone.

and others, that is, the most interesting things, and of course, faust in this regard, it is not only, as they say, the crown of creation, but it is also a reflection of all his searches, in terms of religion, by the way, in terms of love, no, no, we did not agree on that, we agreed that you would be with me, on a first-name basis, you would be happy with me, you want to marry me, today yes, maybe i should take other suspects into development, those whom komulov pointed out, are you kidding? work, comrade major! come on, come on, stop chatting, forward, what's going on? people are being led across the yard, we're passing. tell them that you worrying? i think, work, davitashvili will end up in prison today, dad, ninel, the premiere of a multi-part film, tomorrow on the first. 275 years of the great goethe, we gathered our thoughts about his life and work.

this is exactly when he was working on the second part, does this have any historical basis? this is a legend, which probably arose in the same way as the legend about the feather, which goethe once passed on to pushkin, all this is of course untrue, another thing is that at first in russia they became acquainted not even with werther, with goethe's play clavigo, it appeared in such a rather, perhaps weak translation, and then the era of werther began and so brightly that mikhail sushkov.

the nobleman, this is also a well-known fact, wrote his werther and ended up, just like his hero, hanging himself, although he was from a fairly educated family. and then, in some amazing way, goethe enters, i would say, probably, into the flesh and blood of the reading intelligentsia, and so much, i really like this comparison, that in turgenev's hunter's notes in the first story horry kalinych, he later got it out. turgenev writes: "khor was like goethe, and kalinych more like schiller." can you imagine how... this idea of ​​goethe is so ingrained, and that peasants from the village, and the most interesting thing is that this peasant khor , according to fet, later read this story, well, of course, without this sentence, he read it syllable by syllable, writes afanasy fet, but could he really imagine that this peasant would be compared to goethe, and it seems to me that in this comical story there is some very deep meaning, then, goethe is very deeply rooted in the mentality of the era of russian enlightenment, that 's what's important, and then...

regarding the reading of russian culture, add here well firstly i wanted to say two things: firstly, of course, werther and faust are definitely leaders in russian reception in relation to everything else, but neither goethe's prose was so actively perceived in russia, nor his lyrics, although of course we have

brilliant translations, and adaptations, and we have mountain peaks, and mountain peaks, which of course we can't forget either, this of course the goethes, but still the lyrics didn't... didn't have such a strong influence, and apparently, this faustian theme, yes, it turned out to be so fundamental, yes, for the russian reception, that it runs like a red thread through the 19th century, odoevsky, turgenev, yes, well , of course, bulgakov already in the 20th century, yes, this is of course a continuation of this very line, yes, well, and another important theme, this is what pyotr valerievich spoke about, this is the reception of precisely his... philosophical ideas, which is connected with anthroposophy, a gigantic influence had an impact, of course, on russian symbolism, andrei bely is impossible to imagine, yes, without goethe, yes, these two lines, they interact in some mysterious way, yes, through some secret, yes, internal connections, yes, and i

think that it is possible that other aspects of goethe's work are still waiting for their russian perception, you know, dear friends, with great gratitude... to you for this conversation, i would like to finish with this: nikolai karlovich medtner, the composer, had such a criterion, without which i can live, yes without this in music, he says, without this i can, without this, i want to change it a little to ask you at the end of our conversation, without what in goethe you cannot live, taking faust out of the brackets and disregarding, perhaps, the fact that we have already designated russian culture, here you personally, without what in iota you cannot live, if such exists. for me, as a philosopher, of course, these key philosophical intuitions of his, which we have not spoken about very much, are very important, here is this amazing skill, his amazing vision of reality as a complex game

of polarities, opposites, yes, that means, she has a famous maxim in her reflections, a famous statement, he says, yes, it is wrong when they say that between two extremes lies the truth. it is difficult, this is a special attitude to the world, which without which, probably,

i would already be trying to perceive from him, it is very difficult, this amazement before life, this constant surprise, because as soon as you say that you know everything or you know everything it's clear... this is where science ends, life itself, and as soon as this interest arises, and i'm also interested in everything, i'm interested in everything that happens around goethe, in this field, i'm interested in what's happening in life in general, this perception of life, well , let's say, at the tips of his fingers, which are really in his lyrics, i absolutely agree here, they are in his prose, they are in his absolutely amazing novels and they are in faust, this is of course the most amazing thing, if you don't understand this, then goethe will be boring, declarative. probably too philosophical and absolutely out of date, when we feel this living beat of life, we forgot that he was also a theater director, and in general all the theatricality of his life and staged a performance and in general was a director of the pre-director era, if i may say so, because he created rules for actors, which are still

quite interesting to read today, this absolute and sometimes very difficult to achieve amazement before life, which we see in his poems, before amazement before a loved one, when... and quotes and opportunities to get closer to a genius, it seems to me that everything turned out so elegantly, thank you very much, dear friends, the conversation about goethe is not over, i think that we will definitely continue it, i thank you, petr ladislavich rezvykh, petr valerievich abramov, i am vladimir ligoido, we were gathering our thoughts about the great goethe, the full version of our episode about goethe, all other episodes gathered their thoughts, you can watch on the official pages of the podcastlab project.

with you, the podcast schrödinger's cat, and i am its host, grigory tarasevich, editor-in-chief magazine schrödinger's cat, and we talk about ourselves about life from the point of view of science. our guest today is egor musin, phd in biology. researcher at the institute of theoretical and experimental biophysics of the russian academy of sciences, popularizer of biology, teacher, and in general a wonderful person, a complex protein creature. hello, egor. hello, thank you for inviting us. and today we will take on the unthinkable. we will try to present all, all, all biology in these half an hour or so. i understand that the task is not entirely correct, but many who us now... listens, watches, it seems to me that this is necessary, because well, at school

they told us about this biology, we passed tests, passed all sorts of tests, but from a large number of facts, well , maybe something remained, of course, but the main thing, maybe it is not understood, exactly who we are, let 's try to talk, egor, about who we are from the point of view of all big biology, look, you and i are two protein... body, yes, absolutely right, let's look at my day as a protein body, let's go back to drains, where did everything come from, i woke up this morning because the sun was shining through the window, today was a clear day, it seemed to me, when did our ancestors learn to distinguish light from darkness, this is a very good question, in fact, apparently, since time immemorial, the planet is spinning, the change of day and night occurs in the light, on the contrary, in the absence of light, and ... different chemical reactions flow differently with different excursions, for example, ultraviolet, it is

quite destructive for organic matter, for chemistry, accordingly, and at night it is not there, it would be nice to distinguish where is day, where is night, temperature, where the sun shines, it warms up better, where the sun shines warms up better, there will also be photosynthetic organisms that can be fed, accordingly, all there , on the contrary, light will float, therefore we can say that sensitivity to light as such appeared long before the nervous system. somewhere there in the primary oceans from ancient bacteria we can already distinguish those who react to light, that is, if the question is how to distinguish light from darkness is not put in an ethical, not in a religious sense, in a biological sense, this is some billions of years ago, yes, apparently, the very formation of life is already tied to illumination, because, for example, an interesting thing, our genetic code consists of four letters, yes, four nitrogenous bases, to synthesize, well, by analogy with them we can quite a large number. scientist think, and why exactly these four? so exactly these four letters, which are built into the dna of any living creature on the planet,

are the most resistant to ultraviolet radiation, they best dissipate ultraviolet radiation into heat, instead of being destroyed, apparently we can say that they were formed, the primary life, our set, somewhere where there was an ultraviolet filter, where there was normal lighting, and accordingly there was such a need to filter out everything that was destroyed by ultraviolet radiation, well, look, around us? a multitude of electromagnetic waves, of various lengths, frequencies and so on, why exactly the light that we see and distinguish, and not others, there are infrared, some radio waves, this is a very good question, in fact, different biological objects see a little differently, what we see exactly the way we see is far from a universal thing, for example, among other mammals, almost no one sees red light, they see only with two... with their typical cones, we see the full picture of some kind for a dog,

a cat, this world will be turquoise-yellow, rather, our three-color vision arose not so long ago evolutionarily, because it was necessary, the matter in that mammals after the dinosaurs ordered a long life, these are mainly small nocturnal burrowing animals, and after that until now all mammals are mainly nocturnal and they generally do not need light, they are guided by sound, by smell and so on, but among ... all of them, it was man who first began to colonize these daytime spaces to use vision to a greater extent than smell, so yes, our olfactory centers have fallen a little, we smell worse than most, but we see much better, why do we need it, because without three-color vision , we would never be able to distinguish stale from unstable, ripe from unripe, poisonous from non-poisonous in some plate of fruit, for us it would all look about the same color, but fortunately we have learned to distinguish, this gave us a good evolutionary boost, well, okay, i looked at the sun, i saw a clear day,

a blue sky, here comes the most important thing that happens to a person during the day, you need to... from under the blanket, and from under the blanket i can’t i want to get out, probably because i'm warm-blooded, in fact, in principle, we shouldn't want to get out somewhere into an environment that's unpleasant for us. another very important, probably evolutionary acquisition of ours is energy efficiency or energy saving. we always strive to occupy what is now called a comfort zone, and it is customary to treat this badly, but in reality, this is exactly what we were striving for ... all this time, it is difficult for us to explain to ourselves why i should get up and do something, if literally in the present the moment it doesn't bring me food, nourishment and so on, we go to work, just realizing that we will be paid at the end of the month and we need it, it's quite problematic to explain this to yourself biologically, to get up and go to the refrigerator, i can still imagine as a living organism, why would i

need this, by the way, to go and do something that is not connected with survival here now? we shouldn't like it. why don't we like it? because everyone who liked to just work, it's not clear why, has already died out. but still, how important is warm-bloodedness for us, could man, with his intellectual greatness, have emerged from non-warm-blooded creatures. when the world was just beginning to colonize the continents inland, basically everyone was amphibious, there was a division into two fairly large groups, those who one.

relates to temperature and to moisture conservation, imagine this situation: you take a lizard in your arms, you are kicked out into the cold in winter, you are cold, unpleasant, yes, we begin to shiver, we generate heat, we through there half an hour they let us back into the house, we have a runny nose, we are angry, but we are alive , we were able to cope with it, at this point, what with the lizard, it slowly freezes, does not move, dies, it will no longer be alive when it goes back into the warmth, at the same time another... situation, we arrive somewhere warm and the temperature outside is 30°. 30° is actually colder than what i have inside, i have 36, but i am still hot, i am drenched in sweat, i am dying, i am forced to spend a colossal amount of moisture just to hold myself up, well, it's called homeostasis, at this point the lizard is at its peak of activity, it reaches a completely different level of energy consumption,

it warms up from the sun, it runs completely calmly, does not waste moisture, this is precisely the key - the root of the differences, we, as meat-eating animals, warm-blooded, are sharpened, well , more for cool and humid, and those who, whom we call reptiles, they are more for hot and dry, and it is impossible to say which group, well, or what, is more important or more progressive, they are simply sharpened for different conditions, warm-bloodedness, it is tied to the habitat zone, here in your picture you have two skulls that differ only in holes, huh? they are the same size, is it possible to assume which of the paths had a greater chance of growing the brain to our intellectual state, in fact, the intellectualization of animals is also a rather slippery question, because we are very smart, yes, but among mammals in general there are also quite primitive ones from the point of view of intelligence, stupid ones, we will call them

animals like a mouse or a field mouse, and birds, which went along the diapsitis branch, there are also extremely. for example, some corvids, they solve puzzles at the level of three-year-old children, which most mammals cannot cope with. the level of intelligence and brain development, it is apparently unpredictable, it is formed in different groups, depending on the need for its formation, because it seems to us that the brain, intelligence, is very important, but by and large it would only interfere with most animals, what level of intelligence is necessary to survive? you need to be a little smarter than what you eat. if, for example, you are a herbivore, you eat grass, then being too smart is actually expensive , the grass won’t be enough, you have to, on the contrary, not overload yourself with intellectual activity, otherwise you will die of hunger, this is for animals, for people, yes, yes, yes, dear viewers, listeners, please do not take this as a recommendation from biologists. egor,

i have a question for you that we got from school literature, why don’t people fly? well, in a biological sense, could such a developed organism as a human, well, with such intelligence, to develop from some kind of flying creature, definitely. we still don’t have it, because again, among birds there are also highly intelligent individuals, the same crows, which generally cope, and we don’t know, unfortunately, what is generally necessary for the emergence of intelligence, why exactly people do not evolve enough to fly, we can say, well , we can, probably, relying only on the fact that, firstly, we need grasping limbs and , secondly, that we no longer need to fly, we now make ourselves airplanes, with the help of intelligence we can solve more.

valuable dinosaurs, and this is very funny, and there are two groups of dinosaurs, birds pelvic and lizard-pelvic, guess to whom modern birds belong, naturally to lizard-pelvic, lizard-pelvic, birds are lizard-pelvic dinosaurs that are still among us, and this is wonderful, with you the podcast cat schrödinger, and we talk about ourselves about life from the point of view of. biology, look, egor, you just drank water and demonstrated to us a part, i would even say, not of the earthly, cosmic process, after all, life is

water, we are made of water, and like all living things, we once emerged from this water, in this very water all the chemistry necessary for the formation of life was once dissolved. in principle, the presence of liquid water is the main criterion that we now apply to... planets, roughly assuming whether life can arise on them or not. there is a very interesting concept, it is called, well, in russian, the habitable zone, well, it is somehow dry, scientific, there is a more lyrical name, the gold-leaf zone. the fact is that a planet can be at different distances from its luminary and if too close, then too hot. water boils away, it is not in liquid form. too far, too cold, it will be frozen. there is only a narrow. strip, again for each star it will be in its place, but only in this narrow strip will there be an orbit of the planet, if then there will be liquid water on it, why actually the zone

of the goldeneye, because this is the english-language analogue of our fairy tale masha and the three bears, everyone remembers what the trick is there, too hot porridge, too cold porridge, porridge just right, then what is needed, here are the zones of goldenrods i recommend to remember in this terminology much more pleasantly our solar system, of course we are on... red for this just environment in dry form will not work, in the form of ice, of course , too, in gaseous there is some probability, but

again all this will work much worse, besides gaseous form requires heating, there complex chemistry will not work, it will be destroyed, and we have in the end what we have: a narrow strip, liquid and the chemistry that is inside us, well, not every liquid, because if you had kerosene or ammonia or something else there, i think the reactions would not have gone so well. to grow from bacteria to a person, i don’t agree here, maybe ammonia would really be too heavy for especially if there were a whole ocean of it on our planet, but we could theoretically assume the emergence of life in another liquid, for example in the same kerosene, kerosene is organic, there, well, over time, i suppose, something could have started, okay, i’m returning to our morning with you today, we woke up.

the transition of an electron from one to another, so that these processes, essentially chemical, require it was possible to synthesize proteins, double dna, all this in our internal molecular kitchen to do, so in search of this electron, life has not extracted it from anywhere, the first bacteria are considered to have extracted it by oxidizing iron, because iron was then quite a lot dissolved in the ocean and those layers of iron that we now extract from the earth, in many ways this... there are even

bacteria that can feed on electrons directly, that is, bacteria essentially feeding on electricity, you can connect them with plus and minus, they will build a power line from their bodies, electrons will run, and this will be enough energy. it is more difficult when we imagine nutrition, yes, that we chew and swallow something, it appeared, accordingly, also later, but the principle is the same.

from the point of view of the chemical formula again identical to combustion on the released energy again we get our own electron, we can either store it, or spend on synthesizing some kind of bilok, that's what we live on, but look, here's our breakfast, which consists of water on the one hand, and a sandwich with sausage on the other hand, well, when the air that we breathe is air, others had this scheme from the very beginning. oxygen breathing, of course, no, it appeared, well, relatively to most of the guys on this slide quite late, as i already said, on this primary earth, in the era of katarchia, archaea, the conditions were not the same as now, they mainly ate, apparently, microorganisms that dissolved in water by chemosynthesis, but as soon as it exhausted itself, as soon as the amount of iron dissolved in the ocean decreased to a certain point, it

was necessary to look for what... photosynthetic organisms also appeared, those who learned to use the energy of sunlight for exactly the same thing, in order to get an electron for themselves, the by-product of this reaction was oxygen, now for us it is synonymous with life, but in general, initially the most terrible poison oxidizer of everything, only oxygen began to be released in sufficient quantities, everything the remaining iron in the ocean immediately self-oxidized, everything that oxidized iron also oxidized, this can probably be called one of those... the first global extinctions, when oxygen from some bacteria killed, i don't know, about 90 percent of everyone else, how is it in this scheme, who became food, who became the eater, or was it unpredictable? well, we said that oxygen itself began to form on earth, oxygen, as soon as it ceased to be the most terrible poison, as soon as those who were accustomed to it appeared, immediately appeared the ability to use it and one of

the main... oxygen is to grab something inside yourself with oxygen to oxidize, the same thing that we are still doing, those bacteria appeared that began to do this, take ready-made organic matter from photosynthetics, why try yourself, when you can select, take more oxygen, which they received, in fact , photosynthesis is directed in the opposite direction, if photosynthesis is water, carbon dioxide, organic matter, oxygen, then here... you and i, most other animals do exactly the opposite. we take organic matter, launch oxygen the process in the other direction, we get water, carbon dioxide, what you and i exhale. in this regard, nutrition has not changed for anyone else, we do the same thing as those bacteria that have learned to survive with oxygen. moreover, the very formation of our cells is the so-called symbiogenesis, that is, one cell, we now

know what it was. apparently, some ancient archaea is also such a single-celled organism, it ate this bacterium that can use oxygen and did not digest it, but left it inside itself as a separate organ. and these oxygen-using bacteria are still among us, these are our mitochondria inside each of our cells there is essentially a symbiont, a bacterium, and it is not a stretch to say symbion, they have their own dna, we have our main dna in the nucleus in the mitochondria, they have their own membranes, they themselves can somehow communicate and reproduce inside the cells, now all this together is called the mitochondria, and studying the population of mitochondria specifically in the cells, we are...

you don't have a photo, it's strange, where are they, were they here, my god, how he looks like my son, you are the only real witness, the only person he came to

openly, well, major, the hunt has begun, the confrontation, the premiere of the legendary book by yulian semyonov. with you is the podcast schrödinger's cat, and we are talking about ourselves, about life from the point of view of biology, even now it is necessary for all areas of knowledge to be somehow integrated with each other, here is russian literature, or non-russian or world literature, wherever you look, there is some kind of love drama, and a love drama still arises when there are two sexes, when these two sexes appeared and how inevitable it was, in general, what we can call a sexual process: even asexual bacteria have it, because any sexual process is an exchange of genes and this is incredibly important, to pass on a piece of hereditary information to someone, this is essentially passing on to someone the ability to make a new protein, and even primitive cells, well, after all

, having a nucleus, that is, primitive eokaryotes of single cells, some amoeba, already have all the variety of sexual processes that we can imagine, this inevitably had to arise in sexual reproduction. there are a lot of advantages, first of all, when we inherit a genome from two parents at once, from dad and mom, we get a double set of genes, if one gene breaks, there is a second spare, mutation or loss of chromosome, we do not die, secondly, we can get the opportunity to change even more, while one gene changes, little by little turns into something new, there is a second one, which is its activity. well, finally, the most important thing, we can constantly in each next generation get a completely crazy and a diverse set of genes. if we did not have sexual reproduction, we would, let's say, be produced asexually from

one parent, we would be too similar, we would be, roughly speaking, genetically identical clones, and any virus, any bacteria that was simply guessed, we would be mowed down immediately, this was the case, for example, with bananas, because bananas are clones. we lost several types of banana simply because an epidemic happened, and no one has protection, in spite of this, with our method of sexual reproduction, the combination is such that no matter what terrible threat comes to us, i don’t know, plague, cholera, covid, in any case we will have some people, some representatives who will adapt to it and protect themselves from it, who will have immunity, and of course, sexual reproduction is not just finding someone in nature for yourself...

as we see, in the development of life on the planet, an excellent number, it turned out really well, well , how good, after all, it’s not economical, yes, diversity, well, let’s say, take us... with you, we seem to belong to the male sex, with from a biological point of view, we are pretty useless creatures, we have passed on our genome, in principle we could already go to the female's food so that she could continue to raise children, but we eat, run, do something, why, why are males needed, yes, why are males needed, if we are talking about any animal population, well, how many males are needed, ideally one would be enough, and practically all species give birth to as many of them as females, that's when these males... went to

colonize new lands, to feed predators, this is an expendable material of evolution, but why is it cool, because it allows with the advent of sexual reproduction to obtain a change in an entire species in one snap of the fingers, in one generation, let's say there is some population, let's say there are deer , the conditions they have now are such that they need the strongest ones, so that there is a large muscle mass, respectively. all the deer quarreled with each other in intrasexual competition, fought, only the strongest of them stood out, left offspring, here is an entire population, there conditionally, almost the entire species, yes, now the next generation is a little stronger, in another i don't know, a miserable 100 years the conditions change, and now what is needed is not the strongest, but the fastest or the smartest, again within one generation the intrasexual competition has weeded out this very best by a new feature, only he left by...

in different animals they are solved differently, what to do with a male who has fulfilled his duty? yes, well, it's not a pity to throw him away, right? why, why, what to feed him? eh, many species really are, as it were, sent straight to the trash, in humans everything is a little in other words, in all senses, it is wrong to compare people with other animals, because we have gone down the path, again, not of physiological changes, but of knowledge transfer, and this is directly reflected in our biology. for example, people live longer than a mammal

of our size should live, some horse, it is bigger, but it lives less, and why? because for us, for people, the most advantageous populations were those where there are long-livers, who can transfer precisely the accumulated skills and knowledge, this is more important than even the transfer of genes, and we are now inclined to preserve all men and women, why, because even if a man will no longer reproduce there. let's say he has already left offspring, he will still be useful to society, he will be useful to the population and evolutionarily there was a selection for long-livers, including men, it turned out well, great, a little more about men, that's why this man has such a crazy, crazy thing above the tail, it's not a tail, as i understand it, as they call it on the tail, but in my opinion darwin worried, how evolutionarily it turned out... such a useless thing, worried,

because in darwin's time to say that the female contributes to how the species will look, that the female makes the decision, well, let's say, he didn't think of that before, he had a theory there that this tail is needed to scare off predators, but of course, no, it's clear, yes, that the most primitive feline, she sees it as a free cat, to eat under, will not mislead anyone, and this tail, of course, seriously, in fact, there is several assumptions why females like this, why they preferred these particular males, as a result the whole species is like this, on the one hand predators like it brighter, females like it brighter, a coincidence, yes, a very funny coincidence, in fact there are two approaches, the first is the so-called handicap principle. handicap is also a handicap, when the strong gives an advantage to the weak, here we

are looking at two runners, they are running at the same speed, but one is also dragging a sack of coal, it is immediately clear which of them is cooler, the same the same here, roughly speaking, the female looks at it and well, sort of thinks, wow, we have plenty of predators, plenty of parasites, life is not a bed of roses, if you can manage to drag such a thing along with you and survive, the guy is probably really capable, there is another principle, how can this be explained, it is called fisher's escape, a little more complicated and... it is more about genetics, if, roughly speaking, one day a gene for a bright, fluffy tail accidentally arises, at that moment the female, again, let's assume, will have... a gene for love of a bright, fluffy tail tail, then in the population these two genes will cling to each other, all the time only females will appear who love a lush tail, all the time only males will appear, in which this gene develops even more strongly, the tail is even more lush, and these two genes, having cling to each other, well, in general, will bring the situation to the point of absurdity, that is, i will say a crimole thing, that

in general from the point of view of biology, as i understand it, the basic version is a female, and a man is such an object of experiments, expendable material and other bells and whistles. well , again, it’s not that, probably, so it was intended, but in the end it turned out that way, there are species that are a little the other way around, for example, seahorses, their male is engaged in, in essence, incubation, he carries fertilized eggs with him, and there the situation is the opposite, there the females fight among themselves, all this suffers, suffers in the battle for the male, look, here is another example of a completely useless device, giant horns. how does he run with such, yes, first of all, he really doesn’t run anymore, yes, in fact, horns, you have to understand that deer, first of all, they are not to protect itself, let's say, from predators, yes, they help it survive in the wild, well , they don't help, antlers are needed to fight off its own kind, to clash in duels with

other deer first of all, the female will look at this in theory and choose the one who won, as a result we see selection for more and more... a thing that runs a little against the laws of aerodynamics, it moved with its wide part forward, and as soon as the forests grew, let's say, here in siberia, all these deer lay in one geological section, very they disappear quickly, of course, the polis can’t run with something like that, it would seem like an evolutionary transformation, like there are some... mechanisms behind it, but it turned out to be a terrible minus, because, unfortunately, evolution doesn’t know the right decisions, it goes through everything in a row, whoever survived, won, didn’t survive, unlucky, they were unlucky, probably, you could say, out of happiness their own females brought them to this, but as i understand it, in our species there is still not

only a competition of horns, tails, but also a competition of intellects and other important for our kind of functions, absolutely right, and... everything that we say about evolutionary laws and mechanisms on animals, it certainly has some reflection on people, but with people everything is always different, we have too big differences from basic survival in the forest, these principles worked for us one hundred percent, when we, like other mammals, let's say, ran through the forests without clothes, but with the advent of intelligence everything changed, now we do not need to change physiologically in order to change... in the environment around us, we do not need wool, we don't need evolutionary selection, we can make clothes for the hairiest, we don't need evolutionary selection for strength, we can make weapons, tools, intelligence becomes the dominant thing, since we started talking about evolution as it applies to humans, i remember a word that is probably

familiar to everyone who listens to us, the word meme, which, if i'm not mistaken, was introduced by richard dawkins as an analogue of a gene, but at... already about culture, about education, about information, indeed, this is a very good analogy of dawkins's country, as in general in in principle we can explain the course of evolutionary changes, i will explain, let's imagine a joke, let's say i just made it up and i tell it to my friends, if the joke is funny, roughly speaking, viable, what will they do, they will retell it further, maybe they will add something from themselves, the joke will become funnier, that is, something will happen... influencing the increase in viability, now several forms of this joke, told in different ways, are simultaneously present, and the funniest one displaces everything in people's minds the rest, this is what we see now, happening on the internet very quickly with the same memes, they appear, evolve, consolidate the most viable, and it's exactly

the same,