earth because of climate change, while this, while a new cold war ratchets up the chances of extinction, but another man made existential threat, nuclear annihilation. so is humanities, intelligence, and collective knowledge, also the route of its own destruction, and the only beneficiary is the billionaires looking to escape the planet in private rockets. joining me now is renowned, philosopher and author ac grayling, whose new book the frontiers of knowledge explores the progress, barriers, and future of humanity when it comes to enlightenment. thank you so much, professor grayling for coming back on. if anyone thinks that they don't need to read this book, you imply that they have their own themselves to be to blame for not being blown to bits by a pentagon in the nation drone. why? why is this not as it's eric? well, because i'm here. i can quote, the graph enforced always used in his novels only connect that if you're able to connect things together a bit, make better sense of them, your much more likely to make good decisions about what to do. you know, there's

a wonderful anecdote about the, a great physicist, the steven wineburg nobel prize winning physicist who when ronald reagan was contemplating putting anti ballistic missiles up in space. you may remember a kind of defense that was installed on satellites. weinberg said, it doesn't bother me. the president reagan doesn't know any signs, but it doesn't bother me if he doesn't know any philosophy and history. and of course, the point was precisely that if you don't have context, don't put scientific developments into context or see how science is changing history. if you don't do that 2 way joining up then you're going to get into trouble. well, little the in fact, you know, i was cradled on the enforced his knee. that's how old i am, pretty we're. but i, i do the with the quote from using which you don't use in the book. when he said, i, maybe it's apocryphal, that all he saw himself was finding a smooth pebble or a pretty shell, the great ocean of truth before him. central to this book is what the more we know

the less we know. yes, i mean it's really very striking facts about the history of knowledge if you like, about until the beginning of modern times. that is in the 1617 century people's fault has an increase of knowledge ment, diminishment of ignorance and moving you the last few weeks are involved in play. one day we would know everything, understand everything. we have a complete picture of the universe and we will have a grip on the truth. and of course, this is inspired by the model of knowledge, truth and certainty, which is provided by the great religions because the great religion say that they have that the final place story about everything. but what's happened since the scientific revolution, many of the 17th century and everything is formed for mashes at the more we discover, the more we find out, the more knowledge we accumulate, the more questions or problems it. and it's been like occupying an island which is

growing in the ocean. and then the big in the i didn't get the longer the fall i end of ignorance becomes. and we realized more and more and more how little we know give you one very striking example of that. if you think of the enormous explosion of scientific knowledge, particle physics, quantum theory at one end of the scale, cosmetology at the other end of the scale are understanding of the universe just in the last 100 years. huge explosion of knowledge about that. and what is the torture? it's torture. we have access to less than 5 percent of the mass density of the universe. less than 5 percent. the physical reality is accessible to to be investigation more than 95 percent of it didn't matter. doc energy, no idea what it is, we can see some of its effects, but we don't know what it is. and so this is a beautiful example of how the more we know the more we realize the last minute. but of course, those who are religious around the world and you've had spectacular debates with

maybe maybe actual clergymen, i will say, you know, ever since a counselor nicely or whatever. they always said the bible or the koran nature in they 2 centuries. these are not truly the they open up questions and then there's a huge amount of ecumenical debate. is it really that me the 5 percent was is the 95 percent dog matter? is that comparable to the divinity of christ and whether he is 3 people and so on. well, and the easiest thing in the world is to get mad in the controversy here. but you do have to remember that even the to a go on the bottom age 1617 century, the church, the catholic church, the center. it was quite literally putting people to death for love excepting the literal truth of scripture. and you may remember that galileo was perform trial for saying that the moods flies around the sun,

and he had to deny it in order to save his life. i mean, to extent under age, the old idea, that's the truth about things that the complete picture was available to us in our traditions. that was the thing that was revolutionized really by the rise of science and philosophy. and in the early modern period, we different world now, which is the inheritor of that very healthy kind of skepticism inquiry, asking questions, probing not carrying desires to believe, to the world and looking for ways of justifying them, but taking out curiosity to the world and finding out what the world tells us about it itself. but of course, someone say that those are catholic elite that we're prosecuting galileo catholic elite that we're sending their message out. nowadays, we will say the science funding, obviously, and you do broach the topic, is the elites, it's being skewed towards elite again, is there that much of a change that we have? it's changing the way science is invested in. and of course, over time we've had,

i know, class managers in this book as well, i should say, well, i think there's a huge difference between the people who take leaving roles and scientific work and discovery. and people who occupy hierarchies and religious traditions. and the big difference is that in the science hierarchy, if there is such a thing that the idea of critical skepticism, that idea of challenging people's results of demanding, if they be replicated, complicates of different labs, for example, checking on the results of other labs of the great competition, there is to get the answer right and get to get that settled. that is very healthy aspect of the way that science develops. it dependent to this tremendous dialectic, if you like, of, of, of criticism, investigation of scrutiny of results. and that is something which is very difficult

to do if you, in a tradition where you have a central received truce and the virtue is to believe them accept them live by them . so very, very different kind of mindset. i mean, i know everyone relies on quantum mechanics for their mobile phones and the positioning and einstein's theories. but i mean, is it really replication no one at school? if they get the experiment, did they come up with a different value for the percentage of oxygen or something? in some way experiment is going to go. we've disproved a huge amount and would be higgs based on it's and isn't it? if they hadn't found it, they would just said, well, we'll keep looking for it. it's not that it doesn't exist, isn't there something on the logical about that? you know, i can tell you and interesting anecdotes about the space on in connection. but you just said that rather good friend of mine is one of the lead scientists on the

children colanda. he was on the compact me on some experiment. that's one of the 2 experiments of just looking for the haze itself. and when they announced that they were satisfied, they spotted it. this is in 2012 after a number of years of going over and over and over the results and being absolutely sure that they really got it right. i said to him, it must have been a wonderful occasion. you must have felt so exhilarated and indeed the consequences are perfect and invest in the work grade. she was knighted and you know, 100 tremendous metal and so forth. but he said to me, he said, oh yes, yes, yes, it was great on that day, but you know, wash, if we hadn't found it, it would have been so exciting because it would have meant that there's a whole lot of different physics out there that we need to look for now dispatch attitude is we set to see that wonder that that, that 1st, that hunger for finding out more for digging into difficult mysteries of nature and the universe or the past for that matter or human nature. which is very

distinctive of the very best buy inquiries, not just in natural science, but i think he story and to look at antiquity and try to make sense of how things work for people. then people look at the brain and how it functions. and in to human psychology, these are exhilarating, exhilarating inquiries. and you know, it's like opening christmas presents the 2nd putting apostle because you don't know what's inside. but you do know that whatever is inside is going to be positive. least of an answer to a question that you've got. and i should just say the range in this book between physics, archaeology neuroscience is, it's all this summarizing, summarizing the field actually before we return to the, maybe the, the class elements and the, what it means today, i mean, just give you talk about ogre it in syria, which you normally say is in the news because we have the british and united states backing against the government back in his limits and so on. meanwhile,

on the ground in syria, in recent years, we've discovered amazing things about the history of civilization. just tell me a little bit about that. yes, you know, it's a very striking folks for me about my grandfather was an elderly father, my father's barbara, my grandfather's, i go and i was born at my father's quite old. so i'm able to say that my grandfather was at school in the 181718 eighty's seem sort of her stomach thing. and he would have known nothing of what we now know about the past. because all the discoveries made about syria and iraq about that. the 1st question is that mr. pertaining the great civilizations that flourished with the invention of writing the origin of the teacher. and so many technological advances, all that was actually known until the 2nd half of the 19th century. and we had to rush just we had the books of the hebrew bible, the old testament,

as christians call it back, all wrapped up in legend, homer but factors, regardless of 70 legendary as well before about the 8th or 9th century d. c. the past was, if there was any sense of that at all was just really racked in the midst of knowing. but just on the origin of the middle east, from amanda, about mid 19th century has revealed to us quite literally thousands of years of civilization all about it. in mister batavia also in reference civilization in this valley, the yellow river civilization of china learning much, much more about egypt and civilization, taking us back 4000 years before artists and the old testament. and that's pretty remarkable is that only got a ball rolling and the ball rolling was a discovery in the whole new period. so, you know, they knew stone age and be development in sacraments and settled agriculture. and

then of course, the discovery of human ancestry taking us by tens of thousands of years, hundreds of thousands, even indeed. now it says the discovery of generations, 6000000 years ago when the buried my earliest ancestors of human 9 die. but be of a chimp and jeez, a sparkling in the way in which time and the past has opened up so dramatically and so tremendously. just very by recently transforming our view of ourselves and i mean, we are really in a way i personally you can see i binders. so fascinating, uncertain situation. and feel that if people had a sensor which they understood it would make sense, their own place in the universe rather different p. i mean, i'm not sure what they wore plain pilots were thinking when they were bombing these areas. there recently,

it has to be said as something more in the front of knowledge after this, your break the news news in the pacific leg around the world, expedition by 1000 miles round the clock in the wall. instead, cobb miss the national personal financial. every country close

by the crew. gavin's food and water. to go to check those for sure. let me know. i got everybody locked down or no more. no food and no water. but really, you know, i'm not sure. somebody either stuck a speech in the coven. you're living like the theme and of all. but in the 21st century. i welcome back. i'm still here with philosopher and public intellectual professor. ac grayling discussing his new work,

the frontiers of knowledge. there will be some view, it may be in the american south right now watching this and not taking they have explanations against corona virus and so on. who be subjected to a different version of history financed by particular interest. would you do? do mentioned the book. what are the dangers of this as this amazing revolution in thought has been uncovered and discovered and invented? you know, the human mind and human society is like geological, strauser geological structure. they have permission, very apt to take quick, easy answers and superstitious views of the world down in the more primitive layers of about understanding. and then increasing me psyche more questioning, slightly more open or skeptical and more rational i think. and the concept of

rationality is very important here, because as i say in the book, if you look at the word rational, you see the 1st part of it is ratio, which means proportion. and so a rational belief is one which is proportional to the evidence you have for it, or the strength of the reasons that you then off before it. and so that tends to be rather upper level of the year eligible structure. people and societies and groups with in societies find themselves to different levels of this geological laugh, which is why we have rocket figures in the moon now. and people used to with the astrological forecasts. hearing 2021. so can i saw surprising in a way that there is this kind of mixture and it's a mixture because history is always on the move, the past is always dying and the new is always being born. if i remember correctly and factor what been i was, i'm thinking a bit about this interview today. i remember that you chose not to go out to your dream of the decade novels. i think you read that you chose,

you're not from graham. she. i seem to a pool and we, she talks about how the old is died and then you is born and in that middle period called and it kind of interregnum. there is complexity and difficulty. you know, it's problematic. the presence is always problematic in that way because it, with us is that mixture of the old and the new. so it's chris might want because, you know, a traditional belief might use very, very modern means to carry out some act based on that traditional belief. and that's just the mixture that we're in at the moment, and it can sometimes be a very dangerous mixture. i mean, we don't go through breakfast again and there were complex breakfast here. argument and complex remain a human famously. but how is it that if, as you say, things become more and more spectral in terms of our understanding and questioning

of the world and the universe has political, some elements of political theory appeared to get more certain certainly amongst maybe it's just the read your invocation of it, but certainly say rusher isn't bad, china's bad as was biden would say change and it's, it's a trump thing expert. so why is this questioning in intellectual circles accompanied the more certainty i, arguably, amidst politicians. there is a very, very direct relationship between increasing complexity and increasing simplicity or the propensity to reach for simple quick concepts and more complex things are. the more a lot of people are driven to look for something checkup, simple black and white. this is, you know, an example of how much is that. just one dimension isn't like, you know, christian fundamentalism in the southern states in the us will fund methodism. anyone can precision it because you can tell a person,

anybody the fundamental team, it's doctrines and plans of any of the major religions in less than half an hour. but it takes a bit longer than that to understand physics. and this is a really good example of how if our understanding of the world is increasingly complex, there's a lot to know a lot to understand when people will reach for the simple answer to human beings like a clear story appear like beginning, middle and then, and lots of explanation, that makes sense. they want to have something big long to. and the simple answer is the one that you, you reach for when you start creating, getting lost in the complex sense in politics that happens as well. so, you know, if you think of a system like the one in the u. k, which like canada and united states of america and india or have the 1st pond because voting system. this is a terrible,

terrible verging system because the car from being made and then the traffic was going to provide for minority based government. it also means that you can get to political conscious and new code arise ation. you get a, you know, 10 kind of position, the views that results and slogans and in simplistic arguments, you don't get, didn't get people trying to compromise or share or work together. but you get division b. c. i said it's most dramatic in the united states of america, but the divide between the republican party and the democratic party is based and so deep as to be frightening. and we've seen way worse than the trunk. yes. that so in the case of something like, it's not going to be neutral about pressing charges, that i think it's disastrous. i've been pretty politics, 7000 years in the case of branch. and then we see a phenomenon, which is we're turns in fact on the idea that but if people worried about all sorts

of things in their lives, you can find one simple wouldn't be fugitive explanation for it or need on the you said back sovereignty. and socrates problems are available one if you can do that. and if you can use these incredible new techniques of communication, because i think social media, the internet, what's happened and google and facebook and so on have been very, very malign influences on politics. but great from the things by the way, the rates are the sort of democratic agra conversation, people sharing news and views and putting people in touch with one another. yes. but they're also reading bad aspects of them because you can micro target people with false messages that other people can see and call out. i don't show a direct info on elections argued for that. but then it, forrest johnson or donald trump, maybe in 2024. i mean, maybe he rent, they read the book and they would come up with the alarming idea that they're on

the right path. because this questioning of knowledge companies seeking for simplicity. so you'd be, they're going obviously, i don't agree with it, but johnson get more union. jack's get flags round. you have more simple messages. people are looking for answers, and this is a good political, maggie, valley and strategy. well, matthew, which evidence has worked in recent years? yes, and i suppose you could trace route, but you're just telling wrong center wrote out more flag. i'd be telling everybody else to watch their backs. when johnson spelled out more flags have because he tried to do them so you know the message, but what we want to be, what we want to be doing. and this is a point that i wrote. the book for parking been talking point is we should make ourselves literate across the field of endeavor and inquiry,

and in particular so that we can make ourselves better at thinking theory critically and evaluation. what people claim people changing because we can make some connections. we can see across the landscape of our understanding about doesn't mean that we won't have to become part of the system will work with become ancient historians or anything. but we'll know each of us needs a specialism. we need to know the skill in life in our careers. we should also have this general literacy, and i think cation and all of the thrust about education systems. thank you. let's us them. in the u. k, we stopped to specialize after the age of 16 after gcsu redo few as subjects of a level you might be once up that university. and this is not great. and the old model, the one which is kind of been chips away. asher, located in the us, is that you provider, general education,

and then people specialize on the basis of that interests and talents afterwards. but if you, if you specialize to early people, new sites of the context of the wider landscape of things into which what they do and that i think is in pounds, it's any part of a complicated story of this day. i know you're talking, i've talked in the past, this size culture debate, though is alive and well. it hasn't changed. i mean, i was talking about history. you, you talk about christopher hill, who's i'll give you a marginalized figure of the great marxist historian at oxford. i mean, i was told, there was a civil war here. he talked about the english revolution. is that an example of the kind of way history is skewed? it's a very good example of the difference between revisionism and a bad, plunging history like holocaust deniers that they say and thinking

about the past in much more exact and creative ways to try to make sense of it. looking african from the point of view, different frameworks workers to be hills did i think and really as significant is that he noticed that if you put the english civil war, what happened was charles in parliament and the rest into this longer contracts with europe. history. you see, it is the 1st of one of the great revolutions. so we think of the french revolution, american revolution, we think that they both should match the bolshevik revolution and the revolution some forks as well. right? and the represents. and you see this as part very, very significant and instructive process. so he was able to put it into context, which makes us see it a fresh and interesting the fresh using this perspective that

a marxist interpretation of history offers that's very valuable. i cited in the book as a way of showing how revisionism in history that ish revising our understanding of something, is different from historical denial. and can be used to inform us much, much more sensitively about things. another example i use, of course, is feel strongly and setting when the cyclist came with, you know, after captain cook, back at the end of 18th century, they were guarded australian as what sometimes called a terror. i'm really use an empty land. you can just take it in there for the, for the taking. and it's only very recently that some historians and australia have said, why on, you know, it was hand with many, many different kinds of, of people living image. and in fact, it was an invasion that wasn't a settlement, and it was of a violent one because there was a long drawn out war between the sectors and they, aborigines,

which only very recently ended. now that is a way of revising our view of history, understanding things different be and trying to do something better now and in future on the basis of that better understand. and in this dichotomy between revisionism and denial, ism is boris johnson. on the denial list side, well, i don't know what johnson's views about history. i had the very may not be sinking feeling about his views of the present to say, well, he does, he does. but i think if i may be frank and rude at the same time about it, i think he's bigger see which model himself on church in some way. and so he's, he's a kind of, well the shallow official version of churchill. whereas i run a deeper view of church show who had many characteristics which we entered my, for example, his target in this during the 2nd war. but prior to it for decade after decade,

he was regarded quite frankly, financial, his contemporaries as an absolute, you know, boss, do it as some people say because he was tell on reliable, politically switch sides and etc. so maybe bar something has some similarity to him in that respect. plaza greatly. thank you. thank you very much. that's it for one of your favorite episodes of the season will be back on september the 8th for a brand new season. still uncovering the stories varied by the so called mainstream media until then, keep in touch with us for social media and let us know who you'd like to see. on the next season of going undergrad. ah, financial survival guide, liquid assets are those that you can convert into cash quite easily. but keep in mind,

no out that to mean to replace. watch guys reported on drugs noted as a way to come back, a great problem. what's the wonder? it's part of the attitude of the nation, not just of north dakota, and it got to be something that you could get elected. this time, the fight against drugs took a check. he told us andrew was a competent short form. this is way too dangerous for him to be doing. clearly they put him in harm's way. a rural college student does interest get shot in the head and found in a river like something else had to be happening a long when i would say wrong. why don't i just don't rule

out this thing because the african and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves, well, the part we choose to look for common ground in the for headline stories. this are a series of leaks on confer. a messages from the us military reveal the panic of the withdrawal from us troops, unable to rescue fellow citizens. we have spoken to the former a special forces soldier who shared the encrypted. our biggest problem are getting people out actually at the u. s. government, it's actually not the man. i know that sounds crazy, but the biggest problem is not valid in italy band. actually it's in some cases of actually help us destination few, all the long awaited on frequently undermine nor stream to gas pipeline project

will finally be completed in a matter.