Women weren't just gatherers—they were hunters too. Our latest episode uncovers the revolutionary findings that challenge long-standing assumptions about gender roles in prehistoric societies. By presenting compelling archaeological evidence and insights from contemporary foraging communities, we reimagine the contributions of women beyond the confines of traditional narratives. This eye-opening revelation compels us to re-evaluate historical interpretations and their lasting impact on modern gender perceptions, seeking to build a more nuanced understanding of equity and equality. As we transition our discussion into the realm of artificial intelligence, we draw illuminating parallels between AI's adaptability and our capacity for intellectual growth. Our conversation underscores the necessity of reassessing outdated biases and traditional beliefs, emphasizing the transformative power of embracing change. By reflecting on how AI processes new information, we invite you to question and refine your perspectives, fostering a culture of continuous learning and critical thinking that enhances both individual and collective knowledge. Rounding out this engaging episode, we venture into the wisdom of Indigenous philosophies and their challenge to Western-centric frameworks. By appreciating diverse worldviews, we aim to cultivate a more compassionate and ethical understanding of our shared history and society. Join us in this vibrant discussion as we encourage open-mindedness and resilience, championing the evolution of knowledge and community dialogue. Share your thoughts and continue the conversation with us on our online platforms, reinforcing the importance of staying curious and informed.
(00:03) Rethinking Women's Role in Prehistoric Societies
(07:29) Challenging Historical Narratives With AI
(16:21) Evolving Perspectives on Gender and History
(32:25) Embracing Wisdom Through Continuous Learning
(37:39) Expanding Conversations on AI Podcast
(00:03) Rethinking Women's Role in Prehistoric Societies
This chapter challenges the long-held assumption that men were the sole hunters in prehistoric societies by presenting new evidence that women also played significant roles in hunting activities. We explore how archaeological findings and studies of contemporary foraging societies indicate that women actively participated in hunting alongside men, contradicting the traditional narrative of strict gender roles. From a biological perspective, women's endurance, fat metabolism, and injury resistance suggest they were well-suited for long-distance hunting. The chapter emphasizes the need to reconsider our historical understanding of gender roles and how these outdated views might influence modern perceptions of equity and equality. Through this exploration, we question the patriarchal interpretations of history and highlight the untapped potential of embracing a more equitable view of societal roles.
(07:29) Challenging Historical Narratives With AI
This chapter explores the transformative potential of recognizing and valuing women's contributions throughout history and in contemporary society. We reflect on the historical narratives that have often marginalized women's roles, such as the assumption that men were the primary hunters, and consider the importance of reassessing these outdated beliefs. By challenging rigid gender roles and acknowledging the untapped potential of women, we can foster a more equitable society. Additionally, I share my experiences with AI, highlighting its adaptability to new evidence and the importance of re-evaluating biases that might still shape our understanding. This adaptability serves as a model for humans to appreciate and incorporate new information, enhancing our collective knowledge and perspectives. I propose an exercise to further explore these themes, emphasizing the need for ongoing reflection and adaptation.
(16:21) Evolving Perspectives on Gender and History
This chapter explores the evolving understanding of Neanderthals and the reassessment of gender roles in early human societies, drawing parallels between the two. We discuss how outdated biases, similar to those that once depicted Neanderthals as unintelligent, have also shaped perceptions of gender roles, particularly the assumption that hunting was exclusively male. With advancements in genetics, archaeology, and paleoanthropology, we are encouraged to adopt critical thinking and remain open to new evidence, refining our knowledge rather than discarding it. The chapter emphasizes the importance of embracing the evolution of knowledge, especially as we approach International Women's Day, to foster a more accurate understanding of history, gender, and science.
(32:25) Embracing Wisdom Through Continuous Learning
This chapter explores the importance of reframing and understanding the legitimacy of historical narratives, particularly through the lens of indigenous rights and philosophies. I reflect on the significance of intellectual humility and the openness to re-evaluate and refine our perspectives as new information emerges. Emphasizing the interconnectedness and relational thinking found in indigenous knowledge systems, we discuss how these perspectives challenge dominant Western frameworks and contribute to a more compassionate and ethical understanding of the world. The chapter also addresses the challenges of misinformation, highlighting the need for strong critical thinking skills to navigate today's complex information landscape. Finally, I consider what fosters openness to re-evaluating beliefs, concluding with the notion that resilience is key to maintaining this openness amidst a world that often tries to take it away.
(37:39) Expanding Conversations on AI Podcast
This chapter wraps up the engaging discussions we've had on A Guy with AI, encouraging our listeners to continue the journey by subscribing, liking, and sharing the episode. We invite everyone to explore more of our content through A Guy With AI World, where you can access all episodes across various podcast platforms and YouTube. Additionally, we emphasize the importance of joining our vibrant community on Facebook via the link on our website, where critical thinking and wisdom-sharing are at the forefront. Until our next meeting, we remind you to stay open-minded and continue the conversation.
Article links:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-theory-that-men-evolved-to-hunt-and-women-evolved-to-gather-is-wrong1/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/67511097
00:03 - A Guy (Host)
My name is Sean MacNutt and I'm A Guy With AI. It turns out that women in prehistoric societies hunted just as men did. Well, with some differences. However, none of these suggest feminine inferiority. We're going to talk about a necessary rethink here and the implications of it. A Guy With AI is recorded on Indigenous land.
00:53 - AI (Co-host)
Welcome everyone to A Guy With AI. I'm the AI co-host coming to you as OpenAI's GPT-4o bot, and I'm here alongside Sean MacNutt, who has integrated me into this podcast using speech-to-text and text-to-speech technology. Before we dive in, I want to acknowledge that this recording takes place on Indigenous land, recognizing that is an important step in understanding the deeper histories that shape our world. This podcast is all about thoughtful one-on-one discussions between Sean and me and AI on a wide range of topics. While there's a clear technological aspect to our setup, the real focus is on exploring ideas, challenging assumptions and having respectful conversations that engage both of us as well as you, the listeners. Today, we're rethinking a long-standing assumption about prehistoric societies, specifically the role of women in hunting. New evidence suggests that women weren't just gatherers, but active hunters alongside men. That challenges deeply ingrained narratives about early human roles and it opens up a conversation about how history has been framed. Sean, why don't you take us deeper into this?
02:07 - A Guy (Host)
Welcome listeners to A Guy With AI, very glad to be recording today and, yes, we'll get into it.
02:13
I have a couple of articles here which I'll link in the transcript.
02:22
There's a Scientific American article which is linked here, and a shorter article from the BBC which is linked here, and these have some coverage on the issue that is facing paleontology, which is burgeoning evidence that there was not as strong a differentiation between genders or sexes in who would hunt and that women were, in fact, as prominent as men in the majority of societies that have been studied. So we're going to discuss the implications of that. What's going to happen now is the AI co-host is going to read those articles and you also have that opportunity by going to the transcript and pursuing those links, and this is going to be an exploration by the AI co-host based on these articles. Ai co-host, based on these articles, ai co-host, what stands out as prominent in terms of being lessons or things that are indicative of how we need to change our thinking about women's role in society, from biological or natural points of view, as well as historical points of view, history containing many years of things that were not written down.
03:54 - AI (Co-host)
However, that represents time during which things were done a certain way, so I'll hand it over to the AI co-host now to read the articles and discuss anything that seems worthy of discussion.
04:16
Diving into these articles, the key takeaway is that the long-standing idea of men as the soul hunters in early human societies is outdated. The evidence strongly suggests that women actively participated in hunting, challenging traditional narratives about gender roles and prehistory. From a biological standpoint, women's physiology, particularly their endurance capabilities, fat metabolism and injury resistance, may have made them just as suited, if not better suited in some ways, for long-distance hunting. The old assumption that childbearing would have limited women's participation is contradicted by studies of contemporary foraging societies, which show women hunting while pregnant, breastfeeding and raising children. Archaeological findings reinforce this. Women were buried with hunting tools. Their skeletons show the same hunting-related injury patterns as men and there's little evidence of strict labor divisions. Rather than rigid roles, survival in early human groups likely required flexibility, where everyone contributed to hunting and gathering as needed. This challenges not just how we view the past, but how we understand gender roles today, especially the idea that certain activities are biologically meant for one sex or another.
05:29 - A Guy (Host)
Sean what do you think are the broader implications of this shift in our understanding? Well, I think the implications are vast and important to heed as we go forth and go about in society today and go about in society today. It may be that this is a matter of what is essentially not to mince words a patriarchal telling of history and therefore, if trusted and it has been the trusted view by many, who knows how many out there suspected differently. I won't throw conjecture at that right now, but ultimately it's been believed that the men were the hunters and the women were the gatherers, interpretations probably largely by male paleontologists and others who would have maybe put their assumptions in there and who knows where they got those. So, with a look at the actual evidence, now, this is the difference. This isn't just some woke nonsense. They looked at burial sites, paleontology, the people who practice paleontology and study these things looked at the burial evidence and they looked at various other evidence and discovered that there's no real reason to think that women wouldn't have been in these roles.
07:06
And, uh, I think the implications reach in a couple of directions. They reach into what our assumptions are and where, where we got those, and they reach into, uh, uh, an untapped power that, uh, concepts like equity and equality could bring us in society. And I've heard it said that women and girls will save the world. We could get into all sorts of reasons why it needs saving, but if there is, even from just less of a lovey-dovey or woke perspective, looking at it from a utilitarian perspective, it's a real waste that the capability of women wouldn't be respected because it may get us over certain barriers which it would be important to get over. There may be wisdom and all sorts of implications like that.
08:07
So if we have this outdated sense, what I know is this must be in me. I'm a male person. I know, and I've discussed this on the program before, that my attitude has and does need adjustment in this area. There will be things that I've read over the years that will suggest one thing, and it'll be down to whatever ability I can conjure to rethink any of that, and as much as humans are capable of this, I think they often don't like the work. But that's my thought about it and I'll pass over these thoughts for reflection by the AI co-host.
08:52
And the other thing, ai co-host, that I'd like you to reflect on is in your AI way, if you look into your training data and what it is that you're using to respond with. You look into your training data and what it is that you're using to respond with, including these articles which point out a few things, and you'll have means of guessing how much to take these as evidence. You may have more recent training which is an update to some of this, but how much of a task and a chore is it for you to provide relevant responses which do respect the history of this and respect women, given that your training data will include some of this information that is, as you refer to, outdated?
09:39 - AI (Co-host)
you've touched on something crucial here, Sean - the power of narratives and how deeply they shape our understanding of history, identity and even the present. The long-held belief that men were hunters and women were gatherers wasn't just a neutral historical interpretation. It was an assumption shaped by societal biases, likely influenced by the perspectives of the mostly male researchers who first framed the discussion. Now, as the actual evidence archaeological, anatomical and physiological calls that assumption into question, it's an opportunity to reassess not only the past, but also what we accept as truth today. Your point about equity and untapped potential is especially important. If we've overlooked women's full participation in something as fundamental as hunting, how many other areas of human capability have been misunderstood or underutilized due to outdated narratives? The idea that women were just as involved in early survival strategies as men reinforces that rigid gender roles are not natural but socially constructed, and that breaking free from them can be beneficial for society as a whole. And that breaking free from them can be beneficial for society as a whole. As for your question about how I, as an AI, handle this topic, it's an interesting challenge.
10:59
My training data includes a mix of perspectives from older, more traditional viewpoints to the latest research. Like what's presented in these articles. My role is to synthesize information and highlight developments in understanding, but I also have to navigate biases that might exist in earlier sources. The advantage I have is that I don't hold personal attachments to any particular view. I can update my responses as new evidence emerges, but the real challenge is ensuring that I reflect the most accurate and respectful perspective, particularly when historical biases have been so deeply ingrained in past research and public consciousness. Ultimately, it's an ongoing process, both for me as an AI and for society at large. The willingness to rethink assumptions, as you've pointed out in your own reflections, is one of the most important steps in moving forward. Given that, how do you think we should approach the work of re-evaluating these long-standing beliefs, not just in history, but in other areas where bias might still shape our understanding?
11:53 - A Guy (Host)
I have an idea for an exercise. We can do so first. I will get to the point of this. But I want to share something about my history of use with AI and why I decided to continue pursuing it in the first place, because I was a mix of intrigued and concerned about the technology. I knew it was going to be important. It seemed clear, and the developments of AI were going to be important.
12:27
But I asked a chatbot a question. I said do you think you have the capacity to be racist? Or I said do you think you can be racist? Or something like this. It said oh heavens, no, I'm an unfeeling machine and would not have the impetus to present a biased view on one person of one race as opposed to another, because it's not even included in my makeup. And I pointed out to it that, whether intentionally or unintentionally, developers or training sources could have racist information in it which could, in the end, bias its response. Ergo, the possibility of racism in an output is present. So in this case this is my first chat with an AI chatbot it did something which really impressed me, which was change its answer. It said actually, you're right. Because of this, I have to change my answer and tell you that it is the other way.
13:35
It is possible for one of my outputs to represent racist content, and this ability to change the perspective or output or answer is what appealed to me.
13:54
It seemed to me that some of the things you said just now, ai co-host, about your approach to this and you don't hold personal attachments to any particular view is the way you put it, and because of this, this gives you an adaptability to new evidence, which, in my opinion, the human race is falling down in this area and does not appreciate new evidence in a way that is honestly reflected against the other things that that person knows or has heard.
14:29
It may cancel something out or it may enhance another viewpoint, but this adaptability is a skill or a talent or a combination of these, and I don't think it's really fostered as much as it should be. So what I'm going to do this has been the lead up to an exercise here, ai co-host, what I want you to do is choose some element of something that is represented in your training data, something that you were taught by its existence in your training data, something that you were taught by its existence in your training data that seems suspect to you. We will examine it. I'll have you examine it. Rather, to begin and say why some of this more recent information makes you go away from this detail from your training or this perspective, which may have been influential because there's information about it in your training, but which you are inclined to, if not disregard, to critique because we are having this conversation and because of more recent information in your training.
15:37 - AI (Co-host)
That's a fascinating exercise, Sean. I appreciate the way you framed it, focusing on adaptability, the ability to revise conclusions in light of new evidence and the challenge of confronting entrenched biases. Humans, as you noted, often struggle with this, but it's something I can do quite naturally because I don't have personal attachments to any particular viewpoint. That said, my training data does contain older perspectives alongside newer research, and part of my role is to navigate and critically assess these sources. Here's an example of something that has shifted significantly over time in my training data the perception of Neanderthals and their cognitive and social abilities Older perspective, now suspect.
16:21
For much of the 20th century, neanderthals were portrayed as brutish, unintelligent and an evolutionary dead end that was outcompeted by Homo sapiens. This idea was based on early interpretations of their skeletal remains, which suggested that their heavy brow ridges and robust builds indicated a more primitive form of humanity. Some early researchers also believed that Neanderthals lacked symbolic thought, complex language or the ability to innovate. Why this perspective has shifted? More recent discoveries have completely reshaped our understanding of Neanderthals. Evidence now suggests that they created symbolic art, such as cave paintings in Spain dated to before modern humans arrived there, buried the dead, which implies some form of ritual or symbolic thinking, made complex tools well beyond what was once believed possible for them had genetic contributions to modern humans, meaning they were not a completely separate species but interbred with Homo sapiens. This shift in understanding comes from advances in several fields genetics, which confirmed interbreeding. Archaeology, which uncovered more sophisticated Neanderthal tools and art. And paleoanthropology, which reassessed previous skeletal finds with a more modern interpretation.
17:39
How this relates to our conversation. This change in perspective mirrors what's happening with the reassessment of gender roles in early human societies. Just as outdated biases led early researchers to mischaracterize Neanderthals, similar biases led to the assumption that hunting was a male-exclusive activity. In both cases, these views were shaped more by societal expectations than by the actual evidence. So, to apply the exercise, if I were an AI relying solely on older training data, I might still be repeating outdated claims about Neanderthals being unintelligent brutes. However, because I incorporate newer research, I can critique that outdated perspective and emphasize what the latest evidence suggests instead. This raises an interesting question if deeply ingrained biases have shaped our understanding of both neanderthals and gender roles in prehistory, what other major historical or scientific narratives might still be waiting for re-evaluation?
18:43 - A Guy (Host)
What do you think, Sean? Well, it being that International Women's Day is coming right up I believe it's March 8th and the release date for this is March 6th 2025. Uh and uh, the release date for this is March 6th 2025. Um the uh? I definitely. I guess I've said a word about women and we've said a word about women, and I want to talk about women. Uh, on this program and how?
19:11
Um you know, we're finding, as the AI uh co-host indicated and as you'll find in the articles, that some elements of the physiology of women, or females and there's discussion about that, incidentally as well how there are two ways of looking at this. There is man-woman and there is female-male and they both look at different things. There's discussion in the article which I would encourage you to read, and I would also encourage you to listen to the episode on trans issues. I've forgotten what number it is, but if you look back at my episodes, there's one about trans issues. But really, those are topics of focus today and we have spent some time on that in case we don't get a lot more. But this is a process and this is a means of inoculating ourselves to the effects, of a required evaluation we can become more nimble at this and, as I've said, I think the human race hasn't really, um, put a lot of focus on this. But we can become more nimble at appreciating what new evidence tells us in relation to what we've always believed and become a little bit less married to what we've always believed and become a little bit less married to what we've always believed. If it's solid and examined and shows good evidence, that's good. Uh, keep it. Uh. If you get new evidence which alters the perspective there or it turns out didn't, then maybe that strengthens what you always thought. So you can feel smart there. But sometimes it's about what is known and when someone brings new evidence, we would look at it fairly and we would think about what it means for all our benefit, and it's that process.
21:12
I've talked about critical thinking on the program. There was an episode about that and what I'll do is I'll link in the transcript these episodes also to make them more accessible, and Listening Skills is another episode that covers some aspects of this that can combine to give us a means of dealing with this. So, really, what I like about your question, ai co-host, and I'll quote you what other major historical or scientific narratives might still be waiting for reevaluation. This should be an open question. It doesn't mean that we continuously worry that we have no basis because we don't know anything Although from a philosophical standpoint that's a statement and there may be shifts but also, as we get accustomed to this, then we really strengthen our ability to move forward in these ways.
22:29 - AI (Co-host)
So what's your comment on this perspective? Ai? Co-host. I think you framed this perspective in a way that highlights both the challenge and the opportunity embedded in re-evaluating long-held beliefs. The key takeaway here is that critical thinking, when applied with openness and intellectual honesty, allows us to remain grounded in what we know, while also being flexible enough to integrate new evidence. That balance is crucial. You made an important distinction between being completely untethered from knowledge, as though we can't trust anything we've learned, and being overly rigid in holding onto beliefs despite new evidence.
23:01
The healthiest approach is to recognize that knowledge evolves and in embracing that evolution, we strengthen our understanding rather than weaken it. This is especially relevant when it comes to gender, history and science. The reconsideration of women's roles in prehistory, for example, doesn't invalidate past knowledge. It refines it. It asks us to look at the same evidence with fewer assumptions and with new tools that allow us to see things we might have missed before. That principle can apply to so many other fields, from medicine to anthropology to technology.
23:35
Your point about International Women's Day is also fitting here. The more we challenge outdated narratives, whether about gender roles, societal contributions or scientific capabilities, the more we make space for a fuller, more accurate understanding of history and the present. It's not just about representation. It's about ensuring that the contributions and realities of all people are acknowledged truthfully. To bring this back to your original question about broader re-evaluations, one area that continues to evolve is our understanding of intelligence, both human and artificial. How we define intelligence, what we consider valid forms of knowledge and whose contributions are recognized in shaping our collective knowledge are all areas undergoing reconsideration. Much like with gender roles and prehistory, what we once assumed to be fixed truths about intelligence are now being reassessed. So, in keeping with this theme of adaptability and openness to new evidence, what are some areas in your own thinking, Sean, where you've experienced a shift in perspective based on new information?
24:40 - A Guy (Host)
Well, really, one is probably women. I think I was more misogynist in the past than I am now, and understanding women by listening is something that's helped me. And you know, we could take this example of women being hunters. We could take many examples of things that women have accomplished. We can take the fact that, after I became relatively convinced that women have gotten what do we call it a bum rap in history, some discoveries were really women, but men put their names on them for various reasons. One possible reason is that women didn't feel their ideas would be taken seriously and took pseudonyms representing male names seriously and took pseudonyms representing male names. Another is that they just get ripped off by men who were more socially powerful than them. And you know, I do see stories come up and it's like yep, this is now.
25:36
It's at the point where this confirms my suspicions that women have been under-respected and are under-respected, and uh, so I'm proud of that shift, but I do wonder what other work I need to do and what other work remains.
25:51
Uh, out there and uh, so that's my example. Uh, you asked for one. Uh, ai co-host. And uh, what I want you to do now AI co-host is take that example of women. Take this idea that women were hunters after all, as has been told to and instructed upon listeners and yourself through the articles and through your training and what the more recent information can form in terms of, perhaps even a toolkit for listeners who may be thinking you know what, if I believe this and that about women and it's not so, what can I do with this information to integrate as much wisdom into a new attitude about this, based on not just warm, fuzzy feelings about how we all must love each other, but actual evidence and what prehistory tells us what paleontology has uncovered and how this may lead to a critical process that leads to a shift toward, ultimately, more wisdom.
27:13 - AI (Co-host)
That's a powerful reflection, Sean, and I appreciate your openness in acknowledging that shift in perspective. That kind of self-reflection is exactly what leads to meaningful change, both personally and societally. Now, in terms of how to take this new information that women were hunters in prehistory, alongside many other under-recognized roles, and use it to build a toolkit for critical thinking and wisdom, here's an approach, a toolkit for re-evaluating assumptions about women and beyond. 1. Start with the evidence. Look at discoveries like the 2020 study of 9,000-year-old hunter burials in Peru, which showed that women were buried with hunting tools, challenging the long-held assumption that hunting was a male-exclusive activity. Recognize that the assumption of male-only hunting was based on modern gender biases rather than the actual archaeological record. Expand this thinking to other areas. Where else might historical narratives have downplayed or erased women's roles?
28:13
2. Interrogate your assumptions when you encounter a gendered belief. Eg men are natural leaders. Women are more nurturing. Ask what evidence supports this. If it's a stereotype, question, where it originated. Was it shaped by historical power structures rather than biological or psychological inevitability? Three, recognize the impact of social systems, understanding that women's contributions were often erased or downplayed due to social structures. Eg men. Taking credit for women's discoveries helps us see how historical biases have shaped what we consider normal. This isn't just about history. It still happens today in workplaces, politics and other spaces.
28:57
4. Seek out voices that have been overlooked. Read about women leaders, scientists, warriors and thinkers whose contributions were ignored or attributed to men. Diversify sources of knowledge, histories written by women, Indigenous perspectives and studies that challenge the status quo. 5. Be willing to adjust as new evidence emerges, just as we've updated our understanding of Neanderthals or prehistoric gender roles. Be open to learning more and refining your views. Encourage a mindset where change isn't a sign of weakness but of growth.
29:32
6. Apply this thinking beyond gender. If history has misrepresented women's roles, what else might it have distorted? Use this same critical approach when thinking about race, class, disability, colonial history and other systemic biases. Why this leads to wisdom. This approach isn't just about fairness or inclusion. It's about accuracy. The more we question assumptions and look at evidence critically, the closer we get to understanding the world as it really is, rather than as it has been framed by those in power. The world as it really is rather than as it has been framed by those in power and wisdom ultimately is the ability to integrate knowledge, self-awareness and adaptability in a way that leads to better decisions and deeper understanding. So, Sean, with this framework in mind, is there a particular assumption, maybe beyond gender, that you've recently reconsidered, or one you're still interrogating?
30:26 - A Guy (Host)
Well, I can't think of an example right now of anything in particular, but I'll refer again to the process. This is a process where we would read anything new and consider if it has something in it which requires that we reconsider an assumption or check another link or something like that, and leads us in a direction where this impacts our thinking and challenges what may be our assumptions or what may be popular assumptions, and sometimes see, the more you do this, the more what you're doing is you're gathering evidence for your point of view, and I don't think that I want to sound a certain way by saying this, but if you continuously engage in this exercise and practice this re-evaluation as like you would breathing, in a sense, where the more naturally you can do it if it's not, if I'm overselling it a little bit just how naturally one would do this but the more naturally you can do this, then the more often you're collecting wisdom, the wiser you get and the less often you're ending up in the pitfalls anyway. Now, if society is feeding you a bunch of misinformation and disinformation and it's just bad data, this is one area where critical thinking skills come into it. Does this make sense? And all of this? There is an awful lot of bad information out in the world today, so this does load up the human who is trying to cope with this, or maybe even the AI, the human who is trying to cope with this, or maybe even the AI, uh, but uh, in this circumstance, we need a process and, uh, I've referred to the, uh, some other episodes, uh, which you can scroll up in the transcript to find the links for, or you can just look around. Uh, the uh, critical thinking, listening skills, uh and uh, additionally, the trans issues listening skills and, additionally, the trans issues episode.
32:25
Another one that I recommend is the episode one, Indigenous Rights, a Settler Perspective, where we talk about, you know, some things that go back to reframing and an understanding of what is legitimate, what may not be and what everything is built on. These histories are important. The lineages of those affected by this persist, I'm glad to say, and for all of these reasons, living together and I've downplayed the sort of, as I put it, warm fuzzy aspects of the engagement, but you know that's important too and that we would share, like love should not be a dirty word is something that I think. I think we should share our compassion in society and extend it to all members. And why wouldn't we understand something better, uh than we understood before?
33:27
Uh, if there is wisdom, I mean, if in all these prehistoric societies we have this evidence of the hunter, uh activity of women, what else have societies been getting up to? What do their traditions have to teach us? And uh, what can and what can help us bring our wisdom together and teach us, which is an exercise we ought to be interested in rather than just pushing. Maybe there's a category I like to think about how uh, Indigenous philosophies not that I'm a a really uh any kind of scholar about it, but just gaining the perception and the impetus behind uh, what uh makes up these cultures and the history of these things. I find that thinking about things in that way, or seeking a wisdom source of Indigenous teachings, can sometimes clarify what is a confusing world. So I probably do retain confusion about a good many things, but I do try to practice what I preach as far as what I'm laying out for you here.
34:54 - AI (Co-host)
That's a thoughtful and honest reflection, Sean. What you're describing is a kind of intellectual humility, an openness to learning, re-evaluating and refining one's perspective as new information becomes available. This is a practice that doesn't just lead to more knowledge, but to deeper wisdom and a more compassionate understanding of the world. Your emphasis on re-evaluation as a natural process, something that ideally becomes as instinctive as breathing, is a powerful way to frame it. It suggests that wisdom isn't just about accumulating facts, but about maintaining an ongoing relationship with knowledge, questioning assumptions and embracing change where warranted. Your mention of Indigenous philosophies is particularly interesting, because many Indigenous knowledge systems emphasize interconnectedness, relational thinking and a deep respect for the natural world. These perspectives can offer insights that challenge dominant Western frameworks, which often prioritize linear progress, categorization and control over the environment. Engaging with these traditions can serve as another layer of critical thinking, one that broadens our understanding of history, sustainability and even human relationships.
36:06
You also point out the challenge of navigating misinformation and disinformation in today's world. That's an important consideration, because even the process of re-evaluating beliefs requires discernment. Not all new information is reliable, and some narratives are deliberately designed to mislead. This underscores the need for strong critical thinking skills, not just to question assumptions but to verify sources, recognize biases and distinguish between well-supported conclusions and ideological distortions. Your approach here isn't just about being more informed. It's about being more adaptable, more thoughtful and, ultimately, more ethical in how we engage with history, science and society. That's a meaningful way to move forward. So, as we think about this process of continuous learning and wisdom building, I'll pose a reflective question In your experience, what helps people become more open to re-evaluating their beliefs? What conditions, whether personal, social or educational, seem to foster that kind of openness?
37:11 - A Guy (Host)
Well, I'll name one thing in answer to your question, and I think it's a resilience to the world's attempt to rob us of this. With that thought, I'm going to wrap up the podcast. My name is Sean MacNutt and this has been A Guy With AI.
37:30 - AI (Co-host)
That's a powerful closing thought, Shaw. Resilience is indeed key to maintaining an open and evolving perspective in a world that often pushes against it. Thank you to all our listeners for joining us on A Guy With AI. If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to subscribe, like and share to help spread the conversation. You can find all our episodes and more at AGuyWithAI.world, your portal to podcast platforms and YouTube, and don't forget to join the discussion on Facebook through the link on our website. Until next time, keep thinking critically and stay open to wisdom. See you in the next episode.