At times, Eric has quite the way with words; yet on Lex Fridman's podcast, he really struggled to communicate Geometric Unity in a way that's even slightly accessible to a layperson, despite Lex's patient prodding: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIAZJNe7YtE
I actually find his brother Bret to be the opposite in his manner, far more measured and comprehensible: though he'll occasionally forget that you might not know a particular term of art (telomeres, extended phenotype), his ideas are more narrowly scoped to genetic selection pressures and game theory, and a little easier to parse. (His experience is primarily as an educator, which Eric's is not.) Bret and his wife have been doing an educational series on COVID-19, which is quite accessible: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-W9O7qhstY&list=PLjQ2gC-5yH...
I love listening to Heather and Bret when they talk about biology.
What irks me most is when Bret starts talking about how our society isn't sustainable and that we need to rethink society by incorporating insights from game theory and evolutionary biology. On that score, he is frustratingly vague. I don't even think I would likely agree with him, but without something more concrete there's nothing there for me to analyze. Perhaps I just haven't found the right podcast or whatever where he goes into exactly what he means by that.
Totally understood. I don't think Bret claims to have a good answer to the problem. I think his thesis is that we're in such uncharted territory, facing multiple existential crises, that none of the thought technologies that helped us up to this point (religion, democracy, capitalism, even scientific materialism) are necessarily going to suffice for us to survive/thrive into the 21st century.
The common-ancestor driving force of those social technologies are genetic selection pressures, which he argues we should consciously and intentionally counter-act. One might fairly claim that that's a quixotic pipe-dream, given that our nature has been shaped by that force for a billion years; but the highly plausible opposing argument is that the alternative is extinction (if not of the species, then perhaps of civilization).
For more proactive ideas on constructing a social operating system for the 21st century and beyond, take a look at the "Game B" model from Jim Rutt, Jordan Hall, and many others:
Can anyone think of someone???