To be wise is a matter of emotional
intelligence, not rational intelligence. If we use our rational intelligence,
we 'll consider all things, and it's all about benefits,
which one's better. So what we need is how our rationality is not too often hijacked by emotions, That's called emotional intelligence. That's because our bodies are designed
to be selfish, indeed. [Voiceover: This is Endgame] Hello friends, I often get asked on social media. "I want to contribute for
better Indonesia in 2045." Where should I start? Maybe one of my suggestions is
to learn about public policy. Being able to understand
policy analysis will enable us to actualize solutions to various problems, moreover, if it is structural. Not only within the government,
but also businesses and non-profits. The former United Nations
General Secretary, Ban Ki-Moon Singapore's Prime Minister,
Lee Hsien Loong, and journalist, Rachel Maddow are amongst those who graduated
from public policy. SGPP Indonesia, the first school
of public policy in Indonesia, with English as its language
of instruction, is now open for admissions
for the new batch. further details about the program
and how to apply, or inquiries about your future
career plan, contact SGPP Indonesia through
the links in the description. Now back to the show. GITA WIRJAWAN: Hello friends, Today we have Doctor Ryu Hasan,
a neurosurgeon. Thanks, Ryu, for coming. RYU HASAN: Yes, with pleasure. - We're going to have a long chat. But as usual we talk about childhood. Tell me, where were you born? your school, and then how you
ended up being a neurosurgeon? It was just a coincidence
I became a neurosurgeon. Because I was born in a santri family, in super religious family,
in fact, boarding schools. I am autistic, born autistic. So I was someone with special needs. But now, it lessens. So I was someone with special needs,
and still am I could only reach the 5th / 6th grade
of elemntary school because of that special need.
- In Surabaya? - In Malang. Then my junior high school
was also in Malang, My high school is also in Malang. Well, the collage was in Surabaya. I actually don't know, why do I want to be a doctor, Because at that time I was confused
about what to do. In my sense, there is no certain fact
or the lesson what I like more, everyone is happy. I'm happy with all the lesson. Although I'm always fighting
with the teacher. Always fighting, starting from art lessons,
math lessons. I learned calculus when I was
in 6th grade. Because I'm happy. I calculate, for example, kinetic energy in middle school with calculus. That's my teachers say,
"What formula do you use?" "The one Einstein used," I said.
For example like that. Actually I didn't have a childhood because I do not know
how to playing marbles, fly a kite, it's not familiar. When my friends playing kites,
I recite the Koran. I read the Kitab Kuning.
That was my childhood. So my childhood was very different
from other children. After I entered medical school, I also felt, "What is this science?
This isn't science." I understand, Medicine is not a science
after I entered Medicine, Medicine is not science, Medicine is technology,
the application of science. It involves morals. If science itself is free of morals. If I look at my own life,
it's not interesting. I'm more interesting when observing
people's lives. I am allergic to many, those
who are not allergic are only a few. - Tell me. Peanuts, right? - I could die if I eat it. It is an allergy that is rare in Asians. If there are many Europeans.
- Lots. Caucasians a lot. - Not here. So when I eat, I'm picky, not because I'm pretentious, no. Just because it's dangerous for me. And I actually have a lot of hobbies. But most hobbies can, at most, For example, if among the many hobbies, what do you do the most? Yes read. Because I, one, can't sleep since I was
little. So everyone sleeps, I can't. People wondered, "This kid isn't
sleeping anyway." I have trouble communicating with people it's because people look at me weird,
I see people, weird. For example, I prefer talking to bottles,
or to cats. - Plants, too? - Plants, instead of talking to people. - Same with me, too. - Because for me, someone who delivered things are not real. To me, everyone is a liar. Back then I thought
manner doesn't matter, when I was not like this. I am stupid or not
emotionally intelligent. To me, everyone is a liar. I understand as a child with autism
and savant syndrome, I understand someone's emotions that's what's on his mind, got it. I know exactly that my father
hates someone, but saying, "Hi, good morning," is a lie. To me that is a lie.
Everyone is telling lies. But that's manners (manner). manner does matter, and that manner allows us to work together even if they don't like each other. This I understood after
I studied neuroscience, That’s manner does matter. So, conveying what is not true is good, while we say, "Lies are bad,"
but lies are good. - You've read tens of thousands of books? - Yes, close to 15,000 (books).
- Sirhaallah. I'm confused about how we can civilize book reading culture. Because if I look at the young people now would rather watch TikTok
than read a book. - Actually when we talk about, "Is reading a book important?"
"It doesn't matter, Sir." It doesn't matter to humans. But for humans who are
steeped in science; important. But for Michael Schumacher,
it doesn't matter. - Okay. - If we say in general, Let's read a book. Okay. But not everyone has to read books. - Depends on where you want to go. - So if everyone is told
to read books too, People don't like it. Finally, when we talk about books, need to get used to if you use the term you said earlier,
it's "civilizing", I prefer to use the word "get used to". Because everything needs to
get used to it. If we want to make our society more reading books, we must get used to. And getting used to it is not advised,
but trained. For example, the easiest way is this, practice is more important than advice For example, there is
a battalion commander, the arrival of the Commander in Chief, he told his battalion members, You guys later when the Commander
comes here, the lines are neat. While that's not the way to play. You practice line for 8 hours a day,
you see. - Told to be trained, or familiarized.
- We are the same, there are children, If you play badminton later if he is a good one, yes, so that he wins. That's not how to play it. Same with books. If we talk about the book earlier, people who read books, recently, it is directly correlated or directly
proportional to the happiness index. The higher the happiness of
a community or society, the more likely he is to read books. Finland, Denmark, once the happiness
index goes up, people read the book a lot. So we're on public transport;
quiet, everyone read a book. If you're here, you see people
laughing while watching TikTok. It's okay, we're just different. So if that's the case, Your idea is how our society reads books, I simply say, make them happy. - This might relate a little to the book that you often read or quote
"Emotional Intelligence." Tell me. I got this book by accident actually. I was studying neurosurgery
in Australia at that time in 1996 there's a book on Subway,
it's called "Emotional Intelligence" written by Daniel Goleman. I'm in my heart, I'm a neurosurgeon, Seriously. It's in the heart. Emotional intelligence, it's just there. But I've always been intrigued
by odd book titles. I bought it, I put it in my backpack, I didn't touch 3 days, until three days later when I was
on duty in the ER, I rummage, there are books, I read. I read it at 11.00 pm. I couldn't stop, until I finished the book
in the morning, until about 3 o'clock I finished the book. The next day I did it again, It's true this book, has logical
and makes sense all. And I think the term is triggered to
study how the human brain works, about his behavior, not how I save people. if there is a tumor, if there is a stroke, how should I save someone. This is something different from I was studying as a neurosurgeon
at that time. It's talking about neuroscience. And he quotes often quotes someone's name which I then pursued the books,
the journals I pursued, his name is Joseph LeDoux and then also lead to Charles Davidson And those were the pioneers
of neuroscience. That's all I'm after. And finally I decided, "Yeah,
I've studied neuroscience too." From Daniel Goleman's book,
that thing called emotion, it takes an important role in life. 99% of our life is controlled by emotions. not rationality because rationality is something
we are fully aware of. So, 2+24, we realize that. But we don't need to be aware of
what we eat. When we think, "I'm going
to chew 27 times, 1, 2, that's not how to play it. Like when I was here, For example, go out, then take a car, then remember it's an odd date,
my car is even, I automatically run; it doesn't think. It is driven by my emotions,
not my rationality. That my decision to take the taxi,
it was a rational decision. But as soon as I turn off the car engine,
get out, it's all run by my emotions. The big role of emotion here is determine whether someone
is emotionally intelligent or not. For example, if we see someone who nice to hear, do not continue to provoke emotions, it's emotionally intelligent,
in fact he is. Make other people comfortable with him. People who are happy and make others happy that too he is emotionally intelligent. If intelligence itself, if we look
at what intelligence is, intelligence is how the individual able to survive as long as possible, it's smart. So the intelligence of cockroaches
is different from human intelligence.
But what is intelligence, how can a cockroach survive as long as possible,
it's individual intelligence. But if the intelligence of the species, how did the species survive
as long as possible on the stage of life. For example, the intelligence
of homo sapiens when compared to Homo Erectus still nothing, they last 2 million years. But individually, human intelligence increases when compared for example
120 years ago, in 1900, The average person dies at the age of 47. Now, human life expectancy; 82 years. We are twice as smart individually although this intelligence is more
due to community intelligence, cumulative intelligence,
or distributed intelligence, or clustered brightness. Mr. Gita, you still look fresh it's because of our shared intelligence. We understand a healthier way of life, then we have a disease, we are how to deal with it, so that the human life expectancy
increases sharply in the last 50 years. Individually, humans are getting smarter. But species-wise, later. History will prove it later. That's intelligence. The more emotionally intelligent, turns out to make our lives more quality. Because the more intelligent we
are emotionally, the happier we are. The happier we are,
the more rational we are. So if in Goleman's book it is he talks about how emotions all too often hijack
our rationality. When the portion of our nationality
was given a slightly larger portion, it makes our life more quality. Well, because our lives are
better quality, The results are also of higher quality, and that makes happy societies, they are more productive.
Although it looks more relaxed. Relax, 5 o'clock lounging. What do they do? 5pm sitting, evening at the Bistro,
drinking, eating, because they live in prosperity,
their faces are all happy. That's in Daniel Goleman. So, the so-called Daniel Goleman, in that short time changed the direction of my attention
to the world. - How can we cultivate community capacity to be able to produce leadership rich with emotional intelligence but also cognitive work too. - The problem is a cognitive problem,
Sir, that's the problem. because of that human cognition developing or changing rapidly, while our brains haven't evolved yet. Our brains are exactly the same
as the brains of our ancestors 200 years ago. Exactly the same. The way it works is also exactly the same. So if given a certain stimulus, will give a uniform response. Exactly the response of our ancestors
100 years ago. This knowledge is now important, because it will give
more measurable results. For example, it has been
hundreds and thousands of years since philosophers talk about happiness. One philosopher said this,
one philosopher said... contradict each other. One philosopher to another, there are hundreds or
thousands of philosophers talk about happiness
contradicts each other. If there are thousands
or hundreds or tens only contradict each other,
it can't all be true. Which may all be wrong. We understand this
happiness now biologically. What is happy? And since 1996, We have begun to understand
what happiness is. In line with your question earlier, how do we tie the group, which is about the narrative earlier. Narrative is what can bind us more. Biologically, we were not designed
to work together. We are designed to compete. But because that human finally found a way that cooperation can produce something more productive for humans, In the end, humans design or human cognition about cooperation
is developing from the flock, if the flock
is several families, so flock becomes tribe. The bond within the tribe certainly
uses narrative. Because once there is a tribe,
there is no more egalitarianism. There's the pyramid,
there's the hierarchy there. Give birth to lazy elites. This is what makes the world thrive
indeed. The consequences we have to accept. If we want civilization, we have to accept that there are
lazy elites. Should. Otherwise, it's impossible. We want to go back to hunter-gatherers,
it's impossible. greater cooperation, produce something more spectacular,
bigger. For example, if everyone
is taught to make weapons, say the arrow and the bow,
it can be trained. Let's practice, one day we make it. That's maybe we'll be skilled
at making it. No need for cooperation, only we transfer knowledge
from parents to their children, from uncle to nephew, how to make arrows and bows But to produce one nuclear missile, need at least 50 thousand people
working together without knowing what he was
actually doing. Take for example the uranium miner
in Papua New Guinea. He didn't know what he dug up. His job is to operate
the excavator properly, so that a day it dredges up as much soil
as possible. His job is to transport him
to a dump truck. The dump truck driver doesn't
even know what it contains, what percentage of uranium
doesn't matter to him, What's important is that I have
to arrive at the port in that hour and get this on board. Already. The captain who crossed the Pacific
did not think about it either. basically, how to avoid speed. Everyone does their part
even though they work together. Impossible then competition it produces nuclear missiles. Impossible. Like our history, Pak Soekarno
in the 1960s, It's God's destiny that we will
have our own nuclear bullets, said Pak Soekarno. But if we don't learn to work together, it won't be able to happen. Emotional intelligence is part of
social intelligence itself. So the less we are
emotionally intelligent, the more difficult it is for us
to cooperate and we have trouble coming up
with something more effective and more efficient. - With the advancement of technology, is it more possible for us
to be more collaborative or even reduced our capacity
to collaborate? - The possibility exists. The chances are even greater, yes. But whether we lead to the possibility
or not, that's another matter. We've been told "Over there,
that north is that way." There's no way we're walking south saying, We must be going north. That's the problem. Actually, we already know to increase
the chances of it working, What should we do. But if we do the variables that away from that possibility, yes it means we are going
in the opposite direction though we, "I'm sure to the north."
"But your way is to the south." - I connect with, what is now often
called cognitive immunity that humans are getting less and less
cognitive immunity to be able to distinguish between
fact from fiction. And it's not related to our interest
in collaborating. - Well, earlier we talked about
our cognition change rapidly and can be called a cognitive revolution. The first, because we have the ability
to speak. It was mentioned earlier, which I consider everyone a liar, that’s what we call
manner does matter it is the result of our first cognitive
revolution. We develop language so we can
work together even though we don't like each other. The director may be hated
by his subordinates, but his men could not speak. Early in the morning, "Good morning,
Sir." In my heart, "You just die, okay?" But the director may also hate
his subordinates, but can't say. Once they talk to each other,
hate each other, can't work with them. So, the first cognitive revolution, because we speak the language
it produces manners, actual fiction. Fiction is not real. But important. For example, is Indonesia fiction or not?
Fiction. - And leaders can't be leaders
without fiction. - Yes. For example, if we talk, our bodies, our physiques, that's the
universe didn't design to collaborate in large quantities. We can get to know each other,
that's the 50's (people). To be familiar. Getting to know each other
is 150 (people). If we used to go to school,
one batch had 200 people. there must be something we don't know. It's different if it's 50 or 30 (people). That's why the platoon is at most 30,
because they are familiar. The platoon commander was the king
of his group. Everyone knows he's a fight, a gunslinger, know right. The platoon commander can't lie, he can shoot or not. But 15 platoons, 20 platoons
into 1 company, that's unknown. Who is the company leader? Who doesn't know the danki? Here is the importance of the fiction. The platoon commander said, Our company commander is small
but powerful. Start. But this is important. This is so important to bind this group. So earlier, you said about
cognitive immunity that our ability to distinguish fiction
from fact it's decreasing, isn't it. But only
the gap is widening. Why? The gap is widening. People who know a lot with people
who know little, this gap is widening. Because in the past the knowledge gap
was small. More and more, between people who
do not understand knowledge with people who are very knowledgeable, the gap is getting further. So if we say that we have
difficulty distinguishing fiction and decreased ability to distinguish fiction
from fact, that is not true, because there is only
a widening gap. In the past, between fiction and fact... - More people believe in hoaxes
than facts. - Yes. And hoaxes are important
to us first. This hoax once saved
our lives in its time, at the time. The era of hunters, collectors
is our brain that likes hoaxes It's easier to live than not. While now it disrupts group ties. From the cognitive revolution
to the time of language, then our cognition changed
during the agrarian revolution, then during the industrial revolution,
our cognition changed again. Just imagine the royal hierarchy; king, a monarchical hierarchy that
has existed for 10,000 years, suddenly collapsed one by one. - What I want to pull
with this thread is, technology is accelerating the speed and
acceleration of the speed of innovation, continue, this fiction and
fact gap is getting bigger, the conversation is getting
more and more polarized. If the conversation is polarized,
it's harder for us to collaborate, So how can we anticipate or hope? that productivity will continue
to increase. If we go back to history that productivity increases
because of our capacity to collaborate, right? - The most important point conveyed was Neuroscientically, this is the last point
from you; polarization. Our brains are comfortable
with the dichotomy. Very uncomfortable with the spectrum. In fact, life is a spectrum,
not a dichotomy. As until now when asked, How many genders are there?
We say, "Two." The fact is not 2, a lot.
The facts are many. Gender is not male or female, a lot. We are always happy with the dichotomy, so for us the gap is fun, our brain, whenever there is a gap
between black and white, it pleases us. Meanwhile, the fiction inserts one of the two
dichotomies actually and it bridges human discomfort. I'll try to explain again, reality for humans there is reality that is reality
because of our cognition or our brain, There is a reality called
objective reality. Cups, cellphones, books, that's
objective reality, there are things. There is a second reality
which is subjective reality. Because subjective is reality,
but subjective, for example hunger. Hunger is subjective. Everyone was hungry. Even biologically, what hunger is,
can be explained. This is the result of such brain work because ketones are burned,
fat is burned to produce ketones, ketones to the brain produce hunger. The headache pain is there,
it can be explained. But if you come to my practice, and said, "Ryu, I have a headache." I don't know if you're lying or not. What I'm looking for are indicators
of why you has a headache. but in case I don't find any indication, It doesn't mean that you isn't sick. That's why it's called
subjective reality. There is a second reality, because
we like to make fiction earlier make up the narrative, third reality called fiction. It is an inter-subjective reality. For example, Indonesia. But is this important? Very important. It's just because our brains are
comfortable with the dichotomy subjective and objective What is not subjective,
we group it into the objective so we consider Indonesia
as an objective reality. For example, "NKRI is fixed." If I joke, You bought it in supermarket. You can
haggle it in traditional market. But actually Indonesia
never existed before. Once upon a time there was none.
What's it to you? Same as for example, let alone Indonesia, This human never existed. One day, there will be none. It's just this intersubjective reality Is The Unitary State of the Republic of
Indonesia (NKRI) worth defending? that's value. The price is dead or not, it's up to you. If we talk about earlier, for example, how we are polarized because we are accustomed
to think dichotomously; you - me, we - them. - Not to mention pumped with biology rich with competition; win - lose. That competition is the
foundation of our species. So our tendency is to compete. To eliminate the competition we are trained not to compete. Instead of us being pumped, You can't read this?
But your friend can. You can't recite this spell, your friend is good at reciting spells. How we are pumped
from childhood to compete, while in those happy countries no more competition, until the age of 9 years,
there is no exam. Because once we are tested, we compete. What it does is train them
to work together. Simple, train them to take out the trash, train them to queue, train them to treat other people's goods, train them...
- Don't be silly. - Yes, it's practice. - Don't be corrupt.
- it's practice. Not being told, "Begging is not good,
it's a sin," that's advice. Meanwhile, what we did was, in Japan for example,
kindergarten children had cosplay practice three times a week. So something is put, Whose cellphone is this? Yours? No. Anyone know whose this is? No one knows, okay then,
just leave it here. For example, if someone asks Shall we not take it? We save. No. Have you ever lost anything? Wouldn't you be sad if you lost
your stuff? Sad. "Well, that's the way it is; sad." How do we help him? Just leave it there. He can go back here
to take it. That's practice. Taking out the trash
is an exercise. Not: "Garbage will cause a flood." No. That's since 1960 I entered Jakarta,
already there. But since we never...
- Just throw it away (garbage). - You can't take out the trash,
because you've never been trained. On the queue. Then what is taken care of
are public affairs, Never mind people's personal affairs. The practice was since
they started to communicate. Since that baby can hold something taught him to throw his own diaper
into the.... - Right. in Japan so. Since he can hold something he has
to feed himself and must be at the dinner table. Simple things are practiced.
Simple but practiced. And that's against the entropy
of humans who tend to compete. - Right. You know, this is actually
the choice we chose or the Japanese choose.
- Yes. - And it's not impossible for us
to choose either. - Disclaimer, Mr. I am an evolutionist, I'm not used to judging one thing
better than another. - Understand.
- Just different. - Depends on the value, right?
- The values are different. - I understood.
- So that you said earlier, that this is a choice,
yes I 100% agree. Choosing to be Japanese or to be Indonesian like now, it's really a choice. But we also have to accept
the consequences with our education
and parenting style now. it will not result in communication in Finland or in Japan, it won't work. And that's what you called earlier;
choice. But this choice has severe consequences. For example, in Japan it is trained not to comment on other people's
private affairs. Should not. - The choice is not to holistically
follow what they are doing, but that choice depends on the value
of our lives. - That's right, Pak.
- which one is delicious. We can cherry pick.
- Yes, we can. But there are absolute variables. For example, that happiness will not
be achieved in the community if one of those people trespassing into someone else's
private territory. This is the main variable. The main variable of a happy society
is that it does not reciprocate in personal matters. But care for each other in social matters. For example, in Japan, it is strictly
forbidden to interfere with the spirituality of others.
Absolutely not possible. You're spiritual, okay, that's
your business, will not disturb your father or mother, it's up to you to pray to the banyan tree,
Physalis tree, or chili tree, whatever. But you can't comment on other people, I don't comment either. The training is like that. Even one, for example, the father
of the bridge worshiper, should not invite the child,
"Let's worship the bridge." Nothing. There is a friend of mine, every time
I see a bridge, I pray. I just let it be. Every time he met a bridge, he stopped,
he prayed. And they are used to not share
their beliefs what else to receive share. The question is, are we ready? If you're not ready, that's fine,
so it's okay to be an Indonesian. - It should be discussed what we want
to choose. What is connected with our
values is not the static one now, but going forward, the visionary.
- Okay, visionary. This is an example, that this
cannot be generalized, yes. Agree. That this is particular, yes. For example, if we go to Denmark
in the 1980s, it is still a mess. But now in order, happy. In the Nordic countries, in Norway, now the prison is empty even the one called
maximum security prison or prisoner to that maximum, the key that brings it is the prisoner, time to go out, he opens himself.
- The WiFi is also smooth. - it's magic. I mean it's magical Norwegian society was
such a mess in 1980, same as here.
- We can also go to Korea 1950-1960's connotation
lazy, dirty, ugly. - Chinese too.
- Yes. But now ... Yes, that's an option. I want to peel this, into the human body. If we look at neurons, recently
there has been technology which can re-electrify neurons for the benefit of whether it is therapy
or augmentation. Can heal humans from Alzheimer's,
dementia, stroke, etc. This is how it ends in terms
of neurology or surgery. - When talking about
neurology & neurosurgery it's basically medicine. This medicine is as I said earlier, Medicine is technology, not science. used for human purposes. Now with advanced knowledge in the field of artificial intelligence we have reduced a lot of suffering. For example, Parkinson's disease. If we install DBS, the name
is (Deep brain stimulation) she doesn't need medicine anymore, he's been walking like a man
who isn't Parkinson's. Muhammad Ali used to not want surgery, because at that time DBS was still early. If the operation may be
a different story. Even now if we make a prosthesis for example, prosthetic hands,
prosthetic legs flashback, 10 years ago, in 2010, in Japan there were helmet-controlled
prostheses, back then. Our committee was faced with 6 people. Only 2 people whose bodies are complete, the other one has only one hand, it's just that they're all
wearing tracksuits. We don't know if it's a prosthetic
leg or not. They're the same shoes, and they make moves,
we are told to judge. Which of these 6 people, 2 people
whose bodies are real from birth there. We're all wrong. So the ideal moves, in our "ideal" quotes more can be done by people
whose feet and hands are prostheses and controlled by his own mind. And don't be surprised, The helmet was now a chip
just pasted on the outside. - Yes, Neuralink.
- If Neuralink is inside, it's outside, pasted on the back. It can move the prosthesis as desired. If this has happened, we replace our bodies, right? This is my leg is not good, I
just change it to a prosthesis, better movement. Not cool either. That's a choice. 1.5 years ago, Elon
Musk launched Neuralink. Neuralink is actually the term
for the development of this chip. It's just a two-way communication. Neuralink can provide
information to the brain, in the brain can catch Neuralink. So if we both use this, Sir... - Don't talk.
- We don't need to talk. within 50 seconds, Sir Gita's knowledge and
experience transmitted to me, My knowledge and experience
is transmitted to Sir Gita. So our intelligence increases
by two to the power of two. If there's one more, it's two
to the power of three. What's the difference? We don't have a private room. Everyone knows, that's right.
- Yes. - It's scary. - It's a consequence we have to face. - Right. I've read this. I want to try pulling again. Hello friends. Thank you for being a loyal friend
of Endgame. Check our new releases of
Future Narrators merch. collections, and keep on supporting our mission to find the best ideas from
even cooler narrators. The links are in the description. Now back to the show. This is in a time I don't
know how many years, or decades from now, if you follow developments
in astrophysics, this is very possible for our neurons, this is shot with a laser, suppose to the planet Mars, got there at the receiving
station downloaded, then put it into our avatar. We're both shooting our neurons at Mars, go on, our avatars both walk
8 days on the mountain there, back, continue to upload again, we think it's more
sophisticated than yesterday, Then we can tell each
other and the people we've been to the planet Mars. What is the future for humanity? - Well, I'm an evolutionist, Sir. Once upon a time,
humans didn't exist either. Because humans never existed. So if one day it's not
there, that's okay too. It's just a worry, because I am also a doctor, If humans can not
suffer, then don't suffer. If you can live long, then live long. The doctor's job. I often say that if
there is brain cancer, often almost all, especially Indonesians, after I explain what to do, his family was a lot, "Does
this mean only delaying death?" I always say this We eat and drink every
day it also delays death. Our daily task our activities, recording
like this will delay death. So that our food and drink
are more fulfilled until next year. The doctor's job is to delay death. it's not making people immortal,
that's not the doctor's job. His job was to delay death. If it can be delayed
an hour, yes an hour, can be postponed one year, yes one year, delayed 10 years, yes
10 years. That's his job. Well, in this case, even
though I'm an evolutionist, I take my place, the living
person must not suffer. Same as earlier for example,
we are worried about for example how is humanity? Humanity doesn't exist, it's
okay, as long as it doesn't suffer. Because what is the human limit? Now, Sir Gita is now already beyond the limits of
Sir Gita's own physical ability. Last week in America, now it's here. It could not have been done
by our ancestors 200 years ago. We're getting on a plane. Where is the limit of humanity? If we talk about earlier, I'm horrified. Because the world is developing, we forget the old world. It's easy, when we were in high school, if we write, other people
can't read it, it's locked. There is a locked diary. There is a key, the
key is if you can carry it. Parents can't even bring it. Back then, that was 30 years ago. If we write, other people may not know. Now it's different, If we write, why do we write
if other people don't know. So the cockroach stuck to our
neck, we uploaded it on Twitter. There is except on my neck. Imagine, cockroaches in the
neck, the world should know. The world has shifted. But if we first imagine, Isn't it scary that our writings
are read by other people? As we experience the present, we forget the old - Because our social value has shifted.
- Shift. Always shifting. In the
past when we wrote letters, two weeks no reply we know. Now, just send it on WhatsApp
in 5 minutes, no reply, people will get angry. Even more
angry when it is read, but not answered. The world has shifted,
it's just that if we say how about this later? Decisive history. So far, this human thrives
against human entropy alone. So far yes. We must fight the tendency
of human disorder by ourselves with the kinds of discoveries that we expect. There's Steven Pinker's book in there. In Steven Pinker's book what
I'm happy about here is just he conveys the fact
that we are progressing. - Yes, but he's a bit utopian.
- He's a utopian, Steven Pinker is a utopian. What I'm happy about
is what was delivered that we are getting richer,
we are getting richer, we are getting healthier.
- The poor are getting less and less. - Our poverty is decreasing. So don't think we're poor. Just that. If it's his utopia, I'm
not like that either. I'm even an extinct human,
that's okay too, if it's me. - He didn't answer about the gap. - Back to how humans later lest it even give us room for movement broader range of solutions
to our current problems. We don't know. For example, that was what
you said earlier, it didn't take long. soon we will be like that. It's just not like the
one in the Avatar movie. That's a lot of crazy stuff. - Only neurons are placed in the avatar. - Right. Because actually we
also don't need our neurons. Soon we won't have to. Because the capacity of our neurons
is limited. If we develop a system whose capacity to store memory is far
more than our brain and that's soon. Same with this, if we have been using our feet
to run faster, then we lose with a bicycle,
we are willing to buy a bicycle. If then there is a system that
the capacity can store more than our 100 billion neurons
working together, why don't we just change that. If this is the case, we can upload what's in our brain data and data processing
(Data operating system) and thousands of overlapping
applications to that system and we don't need to eat.
You don’t need to eat. I want the taste of soto. I think soto is data and data processing. So you can still taste Mr. Sadi's soup compared to Soto Makassar, you can. It's just data and data processing. But we don't need calories from it. We only need a few watts in 1 month,
we're alive. That's if I put it in a gadget,
for example. But then I save it in the Cloud Where is Pak Gita? Sir Gita is everywhere.
- Immortal. - Transcendent And immortal. At that time, for the first time, we have the opportunity to move
at the speed of light. Previously it would not be possible. I'm a fan of the Star Trek movies, I prefer Star Trek to Star Wars. Star Trek is scientific, good. Star Wars is a sophisticated family
drama soap opera. This Star Wars fan can be angry. But this Star Trek, that Gene
Roddenberry from the start he might be obsessed with cooperation so in Star Trek there are
Africans, there are Japanese, there are British, there are Soviets, America is clear, the captain
is American, but this is multi-multicultural when the world was at war
with each other in the 1960-1970s Roddenberry describes
how we work together. but back to the point earlier if at the time for the first time we have the opportunity to
move at the speed of light. Why? We are stored in the Cloud. - This I want to try How to imagine
a singularity. This is an intersection
between biological intelligence and artificial intelligence. Will that complicate the future
of humanity? There are two schools of thought. Some are dystopian, some are utopian. Stephen Hawking may disagree. Elon Musk also disagrees. There's more here Mark Zuckerberg, etc., this one looks so beautiful
in the future. How about you personally
or as a neurosurgeon? - If I look at it, the world will be normal. We are no more excited
than we used to be. If we imagine, How about 1980 we can make
an appointment at the plaza, no cell phone. We'll see you on Saturday at
that hour, yes, see you for real. Now, we're just getting
to, "Where have you been?" We can't imagine 1980 there is life as it is now. But after now, that's all. The difference is maybe this, in the future we will get things very different from now whatever they are all very different. If the problem is whether this makes
our resilience as a human being higher or not, It's history that will tell. It's just that if we say,
"Is it more complex?" Yes, obviously, that the complexity of life is clear, Coupled with human abilities, it creates other complexities that...
not only evolve, compared to our evolution, that one microchip computer unit, in just 10 years, it could evolve
similarly to 15 million years of our brain's evolution. So we've made a novel thing which complexity tends to
outweigh ours. Is it unavoidable?
It is. Because life is getting more and more
complex. The universe tends to be irregular. This universe leads to disorder. But there is one unit against entropy;
this life. From 4 billion years ago until now, It's been proven that life is against
entropy. - 4.6 billion.
- It's against entropy. So we are against entropy.
We tend to be orderly and can create a more regular order and we can understand that the more
we cooperate, the more organized we become. - Understood. But here, the challenge is do we just give up? Because of the awareness of history for 4.6 billion (years) that we must always break the entropy
of our lives. But what I'm afraid of is this technology speed and
acceleration speed increase, this margin of error is increasing, right? - Yes, it is true.
- Yes, it's Yuval, right? Then, when the error keeps on
increasing, logically, we can't keep breaking
the entropy. - In the sense that when humans,
as a species can't break entropy, and humans are extinct, sooner or later
humans will become extinct. - Yes. So we just give up? - Not giving up, life is a matter of consequences. So it's not about giving up. If we can choose something, it is not
surrender. If we have this it will be this,
if we have that it will be that. Both of them have nothing that we avoid. - Right. But the paradox is this, Mr. let's assume we're here, we know this looks okay,
but why don't we want to go there? - Don't forget that we live together. I often posted on Twitter like this, This world doesn't run based on your
"Karepe rai," it doesn't run "as you wish for." When we want something then the community want the otherwise,
we are dragged. Now as we are better at directing
what the population wants, directing what the community wants, so that certain communities treat variables such as,
population/community/individual that since childhood, as a community they set something up against
the entropy earlier. what Mas Gita was worried about,
for example, we go to the path that may lead into
a calamity. That calamity will usually be preceded
by something crazy. within 100 people who are in order,
if one of them decided to deviate, everyone will fall apart,
only by that thing. I, if you look at my position, Mas Gita asked my position, well, let's just assume that all of them
are common people, but Mas Gita is extraordinary, what Mas Gita did, if someone else
did it, it won't be like this. But there is something that yield
the same result regardless, That's exercise. Not everyone, for example, some may not need for school.
Steve Jobs didn't go to school. But that's Steve Jobs! That doesn't apply to everyone. - He dreams differently. - It's not just his dream, he started
from a different place. - Effort, dream, start, everything
is different. - The privileges are also different. But what we do is what can everyone do that can produce something together. That is what determines
the common needs. That what I said, where is
my standpoint, my place, we use it for the common good. What's the indicator?
Welfare has had its indicators, happiness has its indicators. Happiness index exists. Can the happiness index be justified biologically or scientifically?
It can. Well, if Mas Gita asks my standpoint, here is my standpoint. Does it lead us to a more prosperous
or happier life? that's the standpoint. If it leads us to be even more unhappy,
why should we do it? Even though I am an evolutionist, does happiness make humans more
species-resilient? I don't know. Only times will tell. But if you choose now, do you want
to be happy or not, I choose to be happy. What are the happy variables? It's this 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, up to 300. What's the basis? This is the research. And if we look at the Indonesian
people, for example, the nation, the people, this year the country's ranked 94
based on it's happiness. If we want to raise our rank,
we should do the points. Just like before, when later humanity
becomes blurry, and then the gap, as we said earlier,
got bigger, how do we deal with it? I'm not used to thinking
epistemologically, I am more to ontology. So that my standpoint is easier to act. Because if I hold on to the value, later we find another paradox. I better hold on to the consequences. If we choose this, the consequences
are this. For example, we cannot stem
the speed of knowledge. We can't do it. We cannot stem the speed of our
technology. We can't. All we can do is to accept the
consequences. What if we become extinct? What if we are extinct, but our
existence is still there. Humans are extinct, but Mas Gita
is still there. How about that? For example, 7.9 billion or even later,
8.5 billion people/individuals, are extinct, but they exist somehow.
In what kind of form? It could be Cloud or units.
- Transferring all the neurons into Cloud. - In Cloud, they are happy.
For me, I can accept it. - they'll make podcasts on the cloud.
- We'll meet each other Mas Gita is on Mars, I'm on
another planet, "Let's do a podcast." - But I still have some prejudices that the majority of people
are existentialists. - Yes.
- We aren't extinctialists. - Yes. Agree. Because our biology is
designed that way. So this is the spirit,
if they realize for them to still exist, with the realization that the gap
is getting bigger whether it's the gap of welfare, the gap between hoaxes and facts, between the rich and the poor, and that this technology is increasingly
exposing humans to a greater margin of error, This goes back to the point
at the beginning, that emotional intelligence is more needed to unite, so that our choice for
this humanity is the one that is wiser.
It depends on our values. - Yes, talking about wisdom, this wisdom is the result of emotional
intelligence. Wisdom is often lead us to end up
choosing to sacrifice many things for ourselves. That's called wisdom. We choose to sacrifice for
the greater good, for example. And that's because of practice,
because of emotional intelligence. Here I repeat this story, because a month ago I met
Mas Butet Kertaradjasa. He told how his experience in Japan
stunned him. When he asked someone who looked
like a thug, and said, "I want to take this bus." He was escorted by that Japanese
thug-looking guy. maybe some kind of punk in style, at the bus stop, once asked, he said, "Here, Sir. But it's still two hours
away. You should not wait here.
There is a shop there." Then, Mas Butet and his friends
went to the shop, in the shop, he looked, the punk guy
followed him and wait outside. He's outside.
- To ensure. Turns out, he wasn't just
following them. After they finished, he came, "It's less than 20 minutes, Sir.
let's go there." Then along the way they asked,
"Where are you going?" "I'm from Nagoya, Sir. I should have
left 1 hour ago by bus." - And it's not unique.
- not unique. everyone is like that. Everyone in Japan does that and doing so is not an oddity there. If you return money at Soekarno Hatta Airport,
you will be given a reward. Returning the lost money,
it is rewarded. If there, everyone does that,
that's the difference. That's why it was mentioned earlier,
what Mas Gita said how do we choose to be wise,
not unwise, but to be wise is a matter of emotional intelligence,
not rational intelligence. If we use our rational intelligence,
we 'll consider all things, and it's all about benefits,
which one's better. So what we need is how our rationality is not too often hijacked by emotions, That's called emotional intelligence. That's because our bodies are designed
to be selfish, indeed. Our bodies are designed to be selfish. Exercises allows us to work together
in large numbers. Like that before, indirectly, that kid in Japanese punk
style, has cooperated with Indonesians
who came there. Because he's doing what he usually
does, and he didn't feel that it did harm
to him. Well, if we do, for example,
the variables of happiness especially the empathy, which is the main variable of
emotional intelligence, that we can produce a happier
community, we become more productive
and easier to work with. That will, in the end,
minimize the bad possibilities from what Mas Gita was worried about. - And I can say that it didn't just
happen with Butet. I experienced it too, so does with
my friends. Many have experienced the same thing. I want to try wrapping in the context
of technology again. I've been talking a lot lately about how to amplify algorithms
on social media. That amplifies unhealthy narratives. And we can talk at length about
the polarization of the conversation, but what I want talk in neurology
and neurosurgery is if I look at the data regarding killer diseases, commonly,
it was heart attack, cancer, but lately, it's depression. This may be related or correlated with how to virtualize digital platforms. This may also produce cognitive dissonance or the gap between what he
goes through everyday, with what he wants. That's what makes a person depressed. How to fix this? - First, depression is an old disease. I have had depression since 1986
until now. You could say that half of my life
is struggling to deal with my depression. As experienced by Winston Churchill
and Abraham Lincoln. WHO mission or main agenda for 2020 is actually depression. In December 2019, WHO, I happen to be in there too, Our focus on 2020 is
to tackle depression. But suddenly there was this pandemic
so everything was ruined. The hashtag is Let'sTalk. So we actually understand that 1 in 5 people are suffering from
depression in the world. 96.8% of suicides were due to
depression. Depression is often without a specific cause. I'm depressed but I don't know the trigger. I wasn't sad,
not was I happy, My condition is as usual, I just fell into
depression. It's just that now, with social media, we know that there are many
people suffering from depression. It's like people suffering from stroke
are increasing. Actually it's the same from year to year, but there are more people come to
health facilities now. so more cases are recorded. Depression has always been a problem, but now, the good news is as we understand more people are
suffering from depression, the more people understand how to deal with people suffering from it. I am pleased, as a doctor, looking at
the cases of depression and then the information is delivered that now that person should be told, If your hobby is giving advice,
don't go near depressed people. Depressed people don't need advice. How can you give advice to people
with depression? That's important. That's for people
with depression, it's a good thing. That now depression is exposed
massively on social media even though couldn't explain it well, "It's because you have lack of faith
to God." "Good! let me throw my shoes
to your face!" People will get even depressed
if you do that! Let alone, a good condition is actually something counterproductive
for depressed people. For example, I was born rich. then I was a medical student, I was not lacking anything, Why did I have depression?
Why was I sad? For me, that's a disadvantage. What are you lacking? you aren't in
financial shortages, you don't lack anything. Then, why are you sad? Actually, the things that seem to
support us can be counterproductive for the brain
of depressed people. I understand this after I
studied neuroscience. In the past, I was confused about this. But now, the depression is... if then that social media content can make people more depressed?
It indeed can. But the more people know how to treat depressed people,
that's much more important. Even though in Indonesia,
everyone acts like an expert. One can become psychologist and
virologist. In Indonesia, of its 278 million
population, 260 million are virologists. - Just talking about COVID-19.
- Like they know it well. I ever had one in What’s App group. after 6 months, I kept silent when they said things about COVID-19,
I just kept quiet. Lastly, someone asked "Ryu, aren't you a doctor?
why aren't you talking at all?" I just said, "Friend, as I recall, you used to be
idiots in Biology, Why are you now a virologist,
how's the story?" This was caused by information that
spreads wildly so that people feel that the information
is worth sharing, etc. But, as what Mas Gita said
at the beginning, It's not hard in distinguishing
fact from fiction, but our brains are not
designed for that. Our brains are not designed to distinguish between right and wrong. Our brains are only designed to
find ways to live longer. However, this fast-growing
scientific knowledge causes huge gap between people who
know and don't know science. So it's not that we have trouble
distinguishing facts from fiction. Our brain capacities are the same. It's just that to minimize
the disadvantages, we work together. This cooperation means that you don't
have to compete since childhood. So the desire to compete is suppressed
instead, It's no longer like
"You shouldn't lose to him." That is what is done in
happier communities. One of them, if emotional intelligence
is our concern, in this case, working together, we have to choose, let's be emotionally intelligent,
it's a choice. I agree, it's a choice. - And we're living in an era where information is far more abundant
than knowledge. Knowledge is far more abundant
than wisdom. How's the future choice look like? In the last round, we always talk, imagining, what will Indonesia be
in 2045? - Some time ago, I was asked, maybe you as well, but Mas Gita didn't
have time. Lemhanas ...
- Yes. I had a chat there. - Regarding a book about
Indonesian in 2045. - Oh yes, I only attended the
geopolitical forum. - Back then there was a book...
the book was good -Mr. Agus Widjojo's book
- Yes, I was asked for that. - "Indonesia Towards 2045" It's a good book. but for me, it needs to be thicker. Why? There are points that for example if we talk about the year 2045, we are talking about our children
and grandchildren. - This show is not really for us. For our successors.
- Yes. We're not even talking about us.
We're talking about those who haven't born yet. So if we talk about the world in 2045, how do we create every individual
in 2045 realize that he is a unit
of 9 billion units that is inseparable. Let's imagine. I'm not used
to thinking epistemologically. But then, to be wise is how we are aware no need to be conscious, aware that we're part of a big system and every time we do something,
it affects the whole system. Because we're not just a collection of
neurons, we are one unit which is then
connected to one another, and one disruption will affect the other although, in that big system,
we create firewalls if we can be in the middle, if the crashed isn't damaged,
then we'll vote there. This is also an option. So in the future, it's all about
how to be wise, I agree. It's just that being wise has come with
moral standards and that's what I usually avoid,
talking about morals. I avoid it because the value of it
is a lot. It's just that if we talk about literacy, there is one writer which offers solutions to many
moral standards, Sam Harris
- Wow, this can be long. - Sam Harris. His Book, which I consider his book as the wisest, was "The Moral Landscape." - A bit controversial.
- controversial, but what he offered was the best choice
for me. Because there can be many kinds of
moral standards. But what are the most universal moral
standards? Biology. For example, if the moral standard
is humanity, now there are people fighting because of one eats dogs, one doesn't. There's a chance that their friends
sided with the dog But, aren't we talking about human? how come you're sided with the dog?
For example. Once, there will be a time like "Beansprouts aren't for eating.
They're our siblings!" In anticipation of something like this, in Sam Harris's book,
we stick solely to biology. Which can be eaten and not,
this is biology. that's that, roughly. So I try to avoid,
when it comes to morals, but to be wise or to be unwise like it or not, we involve morality. Like it or not. I also try to avoid talking about morals. But my life involved the matters
of morality. Now, in order to avoid getting biased, - I want to talk a lot, but I can't. - The more we talk, I will finally talk
about morals. - It can go even wilder. We'd better talk about the possibilities which we will face scientifically
in the future. For example, now we are talking about
neuroscience. This neuroscience is running wild now, instead of being used to make
people wiser politically, it's another way around.
Based on our political behavior, neuroscience contributes to
the otherwise, making people even less wise
politically. And it happened in the most
democratic countries, some said. America was scrambled by
neuroscientists to the point that some neuroscientists in America, hold their chests, "Let's make a road
map and bring America's political stance
back to what it was before 2016." Even long before Trump was talking
about weird things. That's because they think, "We mess
America up, you know." And it spills over here.
- Everywhere. - don't go far, take Indonesia,
for example. Now, like what we have discussed, how we reconstruct political morals
and behavior, we actually know the answer already. - Our socio-cultural as well. - Well, earlier we talked that civilizing
is to make people getting used to. - Agreed.
- And "to get used to" needs practice. We will never be able to obey
traffic signs if we have never been trained to obey
traffic signs from childhood. So, the sign "80 km/h limit" on highway
is just a crap. because everyone goes beyond that. In Indonesian, without physical
barricades, it can't be done. No entry sign isn't valid,
unless you build the wall. That's because we have never
been trained. So to cultivate is to get used to, and it needs practice and that's our brain. Our brains are not very sophisticated. Scientific knowledge makes us as if
we know everything. In fact, our brains are simple. Our brains are not designed for
any of that. For thousands of years, it doesn't matter
if the earth is round. - This is the last one. I want to try to develop this from how our bodies are essentially
of biology, chemistry, and physics. And when we speak of maintaining balance, it's just about how do we extrapolate
them to our capacity to maintain climate balance, because lately, climate change becomes
a hot topic. And I think of millennials and Z,
and their successors have quite a finite life because the remaining carbon is
very limited. So, are there any neuroscience
perspectives that can be shared so that we can
maintain balance between physics, biology and chemistry
in our world so that we can maintain sustainability? - The first, if I don't really agree with for example, we protect nature. "Hello what can you do?
It's just an empty talk." - Just walk to the office. "What does it mean to protect nature?" Humans are emerging species that just came to life about
350 thousand years ago. Previously, there was none. Preserving life or "save the earth" What do you want to save? The earth doesn’t need you. Even if there was no life,
the earth would be fine too. There's no life on Mars, that's fine. For example, this is if we look at
the interests of the earth. The earth has no real interest. We're the one who have interests. So actually, we are trying to
make nature more hospitable. In history, humans themselves have
experienced several ice ages and we survive the ice age. Is there human involvement in this
climate change? Yes, there is. But with or without human behavior, the world's climate will
keep on changing. The first mass extinction
was caused by bacteria which produced more oxygen
than usual, does it want bacteria? No. But answering Mas Gita's question
at the end, can we? The answer is yes. Why? As what we talked earlier, life is against entropy, humans can make one agent against entropy with incredible speed. They can create regular complexity faster That's AI, we can do it. So if the question is
can we use that? We can! By what? By this,
our only chance. If we rely on the speed of nature to
recover, it'll take long. If for example, with the term,
"saving the earth" "What will you save?" It's impossible
to recover. All we can do is accelerate in
the direction we want. For example, it's hot outside, we want it
to be cold, we do something. similarly, we can use AC. but is AC smart?
It is! If we have the chance, in neuroscience, how can we face the existing problems? the fact that is in front of us is until now, there is no human brain or no human who can beat the accuracy
of a computer, whatever computer it is. Calculators, for example, for children
taking arithmetic lessons, who practices for 8 hours a day,
they'll never beat calculator. That's why I've always disagreed to teach children like a calculator. No matter how smart a child is,
using arithmetic and abacus, he'll never beat a calculator. So why should we teach them?
It's not needed. If you later become an Alfamart cashier,
you will be provided with a calculator. And the owner of Alfamart trusts
calculators more than your brain. So once there is a machine
that can do something, sooner or later, humans will lose. Like 1984 when Garry Kasparov
beat Deep Blue, Garry Kasparov is an arrogant man, no machine can beat humans at chess. Three years later, no human can beat
Deep Blue. However now, the chess champion
is a human-fitted machine. So, no AI can be beaten by
human accuracy But otherwise, there is no computer that can beat the wisdom of human. So the best way is how the human brain and AI could work together
to produce something which magnifies our good. With this postulate, this is the only chance or the greatest potential or possibility to reconstruct or deal with this
climate change ourselves. Because our brains can't calculate
like that if we don't use technology. However, as what we have discussed, a good chess champion is how the chess engine is supported
by humans. Deep Blue could beat AlphaZero if it's supported by humans. Deep Blue will lost against AlphaZero
that was supported by humans. In this case, this is only a postulate, Do we have a chance? We do. We can calculate, for example, that our bodies were made of
physics and chemistry - And biology.
- So if you break down, our body is biology. Biology is composed of chemicals, if you break it down again, physics. So our bodies are natural ingredients that works according to the laws
of nature, there is no superstition in our body. So far, it's hard for us to let go of that there is no superstition in our bodies, there is no other existence in our body
except the materials of nature. Actually this existentialism
taught Plato. So it's hard for humans to say in him there are only natural ingredients which works according to the laws
of nature. There's even no such thing as free will,
it doesn't exist. - It's all chemical reactions
and electrification. However, due to the complexity of
our brain, we respond something we respond a situation
as a certain trend. If we understand better, and we already, for example,
we understand better and we realize or admit that we don't have it all, actually, we can make ourselves happier, then we live more comfortably. Why? We know exactly when we are
stimulated like this, our response will be like this. Why? That's because we do not have
free will! - Wow.
- This could be the real endgame. - Thank you, Ryu. Guys, that's doctor Ryu Hasan a neurosurgeon. Thank you. [Voiceover: This has been Endgame]