Hello.

My name is Amanda Palmer.

I'm a sociologist.

Although I did also read
Human Sciences myself way back.

I now tutor in sociology
on the Human Sciences Degree course,

and I am involved over many, many years

in the admissions interview process.

Hello, I'm Thomas Cousins.

I'm also a tutor in Human Sciences.

I'm a social anthropologist
by training and provide tutorials

and lectures across the degree, program
and anthropology.

So what we have now is an opportunity

for us to just share with you
what happens.

In an Oxford interview for Human Sciences.

So the typical thing to expect

is that your interview would be conducted
by two people, two people

very involved with human sciences
and the teaching of it.

They will be people

who may be in different disciplines
and working from different colleges,

but nevertheless
there will be that common core of people

with a knowledge of Human Sciences.

And what we're looking for in candidates.

In the Oxford system,

if you are shortlisted for interview,
you will get

at least two college interviews.

This is designed to maximize your chances

of gaining a place
to come and read Human Sciences with us.

So that would be the typical pattern
that if you are

if you are selected
as a candidate for interview,

there will be a main college,
which would be

your temporary residence
for the period of two or three days.

If it's in if it's a case
that we are interviewing, using teams,

then that wouldn't apply, of course.
But one way or the other,

there will be one main college
which is your base,

and then there will be a secondary college
that will also interview you,

and they will each do that independently.

There will be no conferring
between the colleges.

They will each interview you
and it will stand alone as an interview.

It will be later
when that information is pooled.

When we're busy selecting candidates.

So that, I think, is the broad framework.

Interviews typically
take between 20 minutes and half an hour

and then maybe to look at the detail

of what I'll be looking for in you
when we interview you.

I'd like to hand over to my colleague
Thomas to say a few words.

Thanks, Amanda.

So in the Oxford interview
in Human Sciences, we don't assume

that you have any prior knowledge
of any of the disciplines that we teach.

And so what we're looking for
is not particular content,

but what we're looking for
is how you think and how you respond

to new information in the moment.

So the structure of the interview
is quite similar to a tutorial of the kind

that you would have at Oxford
in the Human Sciences degree.

Tutorials typically last about an hour,
but the interview will be

a bit shorter, obviously,
and you can expect a fair

amount of conversation
back and forth and learning together.

So what we're looking for in a candidate
is somebody who will benefit

from that tutorial experience,
being able to think

in dialog, think on your feet

and absorb new information
and to be curious.

So in a sense, what you can prepare for
is being presented with something

that you haven't encountered
before potentially.

And we're looking for how you think

creatively
and rigorously and carefully and

and impress us in that way.

Yes, I agree entirely.

Thomas, I.

I can't think of anything to add
other than to stress.

We really, really would love you
to try to be yourself.

You will be nervous, inevitably,
but try to quell those nerves

and look upon it as a sit down
conversation between three people,

you and two tutors,
all interested in Human Sciences.

And to try to relax into that conversation

and not be concerned about silences.

You know,

if we ask you something, don't feel, oh,
I've got to fill, you know, the silence straightaway.

You don't, you know, there’s thinking time

for you to put your thoughts together
and we'd love to hear your thinking.

And it's fine to say,

well, I don't know.

It might be so and such.

And then to be literally speaking aloud
why you think

it might be that, or actually why
you don't think it's likely to be that?

It's like you to be something else.

That's exactly what we want to hear.

Those thought processes of work.

So the degree program
is very interdisciplinary

and if you study Human Sciences at Oxford,
you'd be learning the full range

of disciplines from anthropology
and sociology through genetics, demography

and evolutionary primatology,
for example.

And so and it's very broad scope.

We're interested in candidates
who are interested in the human condition,

very broadly speaking, and who enjoys
that interdisciplinary way of thinking.

So we very much
look forward to your application

and to see you at Oxford.

Hi there. Hi.

That ‘s Molayo, I believe? Yes?

Yep.

Oh, well, thank you for joining us.

We're really pleased to see you
for this interview for Human Sciences.

Let me introduce who we are.

First of all,

my name is Dr. Amanda Palmer.

I'm a sociologist teaching my subject

within the Human Sciences degree course.

As it happened,
I read Human Sciences myself as well.

So I have that longer connection
to the degree course as well.

And there is my colleague here, Dr.

Thomas Cousins.

He is an anthropologist

and he also has longstanding connections

teaching on the Human Sciences
degree course.

We anticipate
the interview will be about 20 minutes.

We'll both be asking you some questions

one at a time,

and there'll be time at the end
for you to just ask us anything.

If there's anything on your mind.
Please relax.

We very much want you to be able
to feel relaxed enough to just talk to us.

And we're very, very interested
in the way you think.

That's the important thing.

First of all, then

why? Why Human Sciences?

Why have you applied for that course?

So I think for me
it's been a bit of a journey

because I actually originally
thought I was going to be a medical doctor

coming from a coming
from a Nigerian background

where I like to say the holy trinity
is medicine, law and engineering,

that was the route
I started to go down,

but I saw the Human Sciences degree
and I think it was really just a big

combination of what I really want to do

in terms of exploring
the biological aspects of humanity,

but then also really getting
to challenging questions,

the more social side of things,
the more psychological side of things,

which I think is
isn't really as applicable to someone

who becomes a medical doctor
in the same way as a human scientist.

Okay. Well, it sounds like you've
given that some thought,

and thank you for that.

And we may well pick up

on some of the things and threads that
you've mentioned in there in a moment.

But first of all, I really want to hand
you over to my my colleague, Dr.

Cousins.

Thank you. Right.

Thanks Molayo. Thanks for joining us.

And as you know, the Human Sciences
degree program is very interdisciplinary.

You learn many different subjects

and then you learn a way of thinking
between these different disciplines.

So I'm a social anthropologist,
and I'm interested in a range of questions

about what it means to be human
as a social being and

and various ways in which human life

comes into social, relational perspective.
I'm going to show you an image

which I'd like to ask
you some questions about, and

you may you may have seen this before.

You may not know it. That's all right.

And firstly, can you confirm for me
that you can see this image?

Yes, I can see the image.

Right.

So you may have seen the film
when it came out.

This film, Free Solo.

If you haven't, that's totally fine.

That’s, er, it doesn't doesn't matter.

But in case you haven't seen it,
this is a film about a young man

who has climbed El Capitan in the US,

this incredibly tall rock face
without the use of any ropes.

So it's, it's a remarkable human feat.

But I'm interested

as a, as a social anthropologist,
but more as a human scientist,

Well, why do you think Human Sciences
might be interested in this feat?

Yeah.

Okay, great.

So I think, first of all,
one of the biggest reasons

Human Sciences would be interested in
this is just the sheer biological ability

to do so in terms of, for example, the
the altitude, how

his body would have adjusted
to that, particularly when it got higher

in terms of the ability
to hang on and climb and how that’s relating

to muscle mass and muscle twitching
and yeah.

And so then I think building on that
from the social side

its what kind of pressures
have driven him to climb

El Capitan, what, what has led to him
getting to this point and psychologically

how is he faring as he starts to climb up

this rock, this rock face
and the challenges that entails?

I think for me particularly, I'd
probably uh, be scared to death.

I mean, you kind of are, you kind of
have to be at that point.

And so I think those would be
two of the main considerations

for the Human Sciences.

Yeah.
Thank you. That's, that's great.

And you mentioned being scared to death,
and I'm sure I would be, too.

But so how should we understand

this particular individual, his ability
to do something

that most of us
would have been paralyzed with fear about?

How do you think we might understand
that aspect of it?

I think particularly
it would show, well, one,

it might show an element of practice
that he had done

some climbing to a degree, which clearly
built up a bit of resilience in him.

And then secondly, I think it would
maybe show a mental fortitude

which might be beyond the average.

Right. Okay.

So that mental question is interesting.

You mentioned a moment ago

a sense of pressure or drive, erm

do you have any

thoughts about, about why human beings

might feel that kind of pressure
or being driven to do these things?

How might that have come about?

I think oftentimes
it can be social pressures.

So when, so for example,
if I promise to a group of friends

that I'm going to make them a meal,
I think then that might be that pressure.

Then that comes upon me
to actually fulfill

that promise, to fulfill that action
and make that meal or people

or on the flipside if people said, Oh,
you could never do this.

So if people said to him,
you could have a climber, he might be then

almost pressured, but not in a bad way,
but in like a jokey way to almost do it

as like a feat of strength,
a feat of showing actually, I can do this

great well.

So sort of

in a way, what you've mentioned,
there's is one aspect of a very social,

which is the sense of obligation to
others, which is a very social phenomenon.

And you've also mentioned

this idea of a dare
or being able to perform in a way

that impresses others and that is

deeply social.

But we can think about that social
in both, in several different ways.

One of them has to do with

relationships in the current moment,
as you've suggested.

But we can also think about those kinds

of social relationships
in more evolutionary terms, in terms of

how it is
that humans have evolved to work together.

And yet here we have an individual who's
doing something completely on his own.

How do you think we might think about

this completely singular, unusual feat?

It doesn't seem very social
on the face of it.

How do you think in Human Science

that we might understand
that singular, unique

aspect of it.

Sure, from, specifically
from an evolutionary perspective?

Well, any perspective really.

That that is it?

I think that is an interesting question.

I think he,

I think in terms of
why he's done it alone,

there must be
there must be a personal drive in there.

So I think separate to how we've discussed
kind of social pressures,

that typically is an inner drive
that individuals have, which I guess

would be the reasoning behind
why certain times when people face

all sorts of adversity
from everyone else around them,

they'd still be willing
to persist in activity.

And I think that could be seen here
as well.

That's right.

So, so he could be doing it for,
for intensely

internal reasons to do with his own
make up his own sense of self-worth.

Let's say we could

we would have to watch the film
and hear what he has to say about that.

Yeah,

I suppose one

way we might compare this
with other species is to ask, well, do, do

other animals do this that we know of
and why might they do that?

And I suppose if there are other species

and other individuals
who can do this kind of

very unusual thing,

what, what, what explains that commonality
or if it's very unusual,

how should we think about this
in evolutionary terms for human beings?

We've never seen an individual
do this before.

And should, should we therefore

redefine
our concept of what it means to be human

as a species that climbs rock faces?

Um, I mean,

I wouldn't
I wouldn't say we should redefine humanity

because this is one exception
in a group of, I guess, a whole species.

In the same way you might find some

some members of a species
which, for example, might use tools.

But that doesn't

therefore mean that the species as a whole
is a tool using species.

And then in the same way,
I would suggest that because he is

climbing rock face, a rock face,
that wouldn't mean that humans do.

I think if you found other species
which did it,

I think it would pose a challenge
in terms of evolutionary lineage.

As far as I'm aware,

there aren’t many of the species that would
probably attempt such a thing, but

I think this maybe shows
a element of ignorance

towards the risk of death.

I guess if we're putting life
and continuing to survive

at the apex of evolution,

then perhaps this is humans
almost ignoring

that inner aspect of themselves.

Yeah. Thank you.
That's that's very interesting.

You brought up a whole range
of really interesting ideas there,

including our relationship to death
and what that means

for us at the level of meaning.

But so one final question
that remains to be how you think about

here's a film that's been made about it
many people have watched it.

I'm not sure if you've seen it,
but why do you think

other people want to watch this film
and what does it mean?

Do you think that we've made a film about
this, especially one that's done so well?

I think we, it means that we recognize
how much of an amazing feat it is.

It's clearly not something
that's easy to do.

And then I think another reason
why we've made a film out of it is because

it's, er it
almost gives people a second hand thrill.

It's like you look at the challenge
you survey to see

and then people like, wow,
how has he done this?

And they want to find out more.

And then I think also from that
perspective, it, it makes it profitable.

And so there's also the human aspect
of people

wanting to make money from the film,
and then you can add that element into it.

And then also that aspect of,
particularly I think I can see

a film festival over on there.

If you know, film festivals are very much
can be very artsy, very much

about creating a really good craft
as opposed to making big bucks.

Like a lot of the films
that you see in a cinema,

speaking to someone
who actually used to work in a cinema.

And so maybe there's
that element of creating a film

which is more dramatic,
more personable, as opposed to,

you know,

superheroes like you see in all the Marvel
films.

Well, that's interesting. Okay.

So so you're saying it allows us
to reconnect with human experience?

Something was quite near to human
experience.

Yeah. Well, yeah.

So you've mentioned several
interesting things in there.

And one of them has to do with
the possibility for vicarious experience.

You're seeing somebody else do something

which provokes a response

for you as a
as another kind of animal, as it were.

So that's an interesting
biological phenomenon in itself.

You mentioned ideas about profit,
which, which raise big social questions

about how markets work
and what kinds of commodities they sell.

But you've also brought up the idea
that there's something

that's being crafted here,
something that's an art, and as opposed to

merely, say,
for example, a biological reaction.

And so we like to struggle
with these kinds of questions about

what makes us human
in terms of our capacities for

not only for tool use, as you mentioned,

but also our capacity
for art and representation.

So, so you've, you've brought up
a whole range of interesting ideas which

which is wonderful. Thank you.

And I'm going to stop sharing now
and hand over to my colleague.

Okay.

Let's turn to something quite different
now than Molayo, and just

to let you know, you may have heard me
scribbling in the background.

We do take notes
because it helps us to know what you said

when afterwards
we're thinking about your interview.

You said in your UCAS application,
in your personal statement,

you mentioned that you'd been doing
a project

at school about

genetic engineering,
gene editing, in fact.

Yeah.

And you just said you were aware
that there would be ethical.

There could be ethical issues.

I'm just wondering, what's on your mind?

What do you see
as the ethical issues in gene editing?

I think a lot of the issues are they go

around, particularly
the worries about designer babies.

And I think that's something
which the media grabs on to very

well as well,
because I think it's something

that's a bit more believable
as an image for people to, to recognise.

And so in that sense, yeah, that, okay,
people are going to start selecting for

particular traits in their children.

So not just physical traits,
but they're also trying to select for,

you know, genes that might make someone
more successful in school, for example.

And then how then
how does that affect the world economy?

Does it just become about
who can afford to do the most gene

editing on their children
as opposed to really,

I guess, much,
much of what happens after someone's born?

So does it matter

if individual people have opportunities
to sort of tinker

with the genetic code of the offspring
that they're going to have?

I mean, I would say from
from an atheistic framework,

I don't see why it matters

or I'm not necessarily atheistic,
but nontheistic framework,

I wouldn't
see why it would matter so much.

But I think a lot of the issues
stem around

whether people recognise it or not
is that there is a bit of a theistic

framework underpinning principles,
particularly in Western society.

And I think those principles
then affect how people view things

such as designer babies.

Would it matter in a genetic sense at all?

Can I ask, what do you mean by that?

Well, you're looking at it
from the point of view of individuals

and whether it would matter in relation
to maybe values and moral codes.

Does it matter biologically? 
If we’re...

Yes. ...gene editing.

I believe. I believe so.

Because if you're looking at the gene pool
as a whole,

gene editing, say everyone decides
to select for a certain trait

that would reduce your variability
and could in fact then increase

your population's susceptibility
to a, to a disease

if it so comes along,
which affects that gene.

For example.

So what would your

what would your view be then, in relation
to the ethics of editing?

Would you would ,you support any

policies to put criteria in place
or, or not?

Yeah.

So I think it's interesting
because I would have

I would have probably said I support
editing when it's used to remove a

like a life threatening condition,
something like

well something which severely reduces
one's quality of life.

So perhaps
like a cystic fibrosis of the CFTR gene.

But I've also read people
who have said that

to remove that from their lives
would be like taking away a part of them.

And I think that's
a very interesting nuance, which means

to honest entirely, I'm not so sure,
but I would probably, that is where I'd lean.

Okay.

Well, thank you for that.

Let me turn to something
completely different.

Life expectancy.

Here in the West,

there's a pretty sort of solid pattern

that women typically live a good

5 to 8 years longer than men.

Yeah.

Why do you think that might be?

I think one thing is that men

put themselves in more risky situations.

I think that's a possibility.

The typical idea is that
that's fueled by adrenaline.

I'm not sure how true that is.

Maybe partly true, but men are.

So even if you look at driving, for
example, that men are more likely to drive, er

 drive recklessly.

So to the point where, you know,
if you're a man,

you're going to get charged
more by your insurance,

at least I think initially, than you would
if you're a women,

because they know that men tend to get
into accidents more than women do. Okay.

So that's one possible
reason. Can you think of any others.

Um... I'm not, I'm not so sure if there's

a genetic underpinning behind it.

But I do suspect
there would be some kind of

some kind of influence there.

Okay.

Anything else, though,

in terms of lifestyle, you've mentioned
that men maybe take more risks.

And yes, that's a perfectly valid thing
to suggest anything else.

Though about

different lifestyles that might affect it.

I think, I think women are also known
to eat healthier on average than men.

That's another thing
which would influence people.

I think, particularly
if we're looking towards the latter.

And so like kind of 5 to 8 years, say
of like a 70 year life expectancy,

I think those habits of how you eat,
and particularly in the previous 

thirty four years, do have a big influence.

And particularly
if men are eating more kind of

fatty foods, are taking in more lipids
and, you know, building up that. That,

those LDLs in their

system, I think that, that might be
an influence as well.

Okay.

And would you expect the same sort of age

gap to be present
across all social classes,

or do you think it might differ

as you go between different occupational

hierarchies?

I think it would I think it would differ
between different social classes,

because I think when you get to
when you're earning more,

I reckon

I reckon the difference would be lesser
and when you're earning less,

the difference would be greater
because there is

there is an actual differences,
I think in behaviour which we tend to see,

I think would be amplified with a
with a low, lower finances

and like minimised with higher finances,
particularly because, for example,

with food, it's a lot easier to outsource
the kind of responsibility for that

when you have more finances and a lot
easier to buy, higher quality food

when you have more money, as opposed to
if you're struggling for finances,

you're more likely and often times
a turn towards a low quality diet.

And a final question

for me, I think,
because of the time factor,

would you expect that same gap

in men's and women's life expectancy?

Expectancy
to be there across the whole world?

Would you imagine
it's a universal phenomenon?

I think it would partly be universal,
so I would expect that there'd be a gap

similarly across the board,
but not necessarily to the same degree.

I think there would be shifts
in terms of how different cultures

see the role of men and women,
or not necessarily the role of men,

but how being a man or a woman
is acted out in different cultures.

And I think that would therefore
influence things

like health.

Okay, I'm only hesitating
because I'm writing down what you said.

Okay.
Thank you very much for those thoughts.

I'm looking at the time and I think
maybe we are pretty much out of time.

But before we draw it

to a close, do you have any questions
that you'd like to ask of us?

Molayo? 
Yes.

So I think at the start you mentioned

that you did Human Sciences,
so how would you say

the course is changed on a broad scale
between

when you did it and now?

The short answer is not a lot.

The content, the content has changed
massively

as we have gained in knowledge,
especially in the fields of genetics

and things to do with evolution
and animal behaviour

well all the disciplines have grown.

To be honest,
our knowledge in anthropology is

is much more refined than it was
when I did it.

The structure of the course,
the interdisciplinary nature of it,

is still absolutely there and present.

And we're trying to make those connections
for you all the time.

During the three
years of the degree program.

It's a lovely degree, people.

Anyway,

anything else you need to ask us, please?

No, I think that's it.

All right.

Well,
thank you so much for joining us today,

and we'll have to say goodbye
at this point.

Thank you.

Bye bye.

Thanks, Molayo.

Thanks. And thanks very much,
Molayo, for that interview.

And now what we're going to do
is reflect a little bit

on that conversation.
In the actual admissions interview,

the candidates don't get to discuss
afterwards with the interviewers,

but in this instance, it'll be very nice
to have your reflections included as well.

So first what we'll do is Amanda and I
will just reflect on, on the interview

what we thought was, was good
and what we thought could be strengthened.

And then we'll turn to you, Molayo,
and ask for some of your thoughts

for the benefit of anyone
who's going to watch this video.

So let me start off

by saying that, you know,
when we were talking about

the Free Solo movie,

what I was really impressed by was, well
Molayo’s ability to think across

a number of different possible
perspectives very quickly.

And what I was appreciating was thinking

about the biological aspects
of thinking about physiology,

thinking about the social,
thinking about psychology.

You know,
the conversation was really wide ranging,

and there was also a moment when Molayo

Paused to gather his thoughts.

And I thought that was very useful, gave him 
an extra beat

or two to, to think, to stop

and think carefully, and then to proceed.

And so I really enjoyed that.

Amanda,
what did you think about that point?

Yes, I agree with you.

I saw immediately that he looked
at the physical side of being able to even

complete this feat,

but then
also looked at the psychological aspects.

Those were the two he picked out first,
and then he differentiated

between the psychology of the person
who actually even attempts it,

followed by the psychology of
what's going on while he's attempting it.

And that differentiation
there I thought was really interesting.

You mentioned mental fortitude
or drive of the person.

And like you, I noticed when he said, oh,
that's an interesting question.

And he stopped moment
and I was really pleased

because he didn't feel
he just had to fill the space.

So I liked that.

And then what he said afterwards

was very, very sensible.

And then we got onto,
you know, whether there's maybe

something evolutionary in this

is there, and I would say

it was a question
he had maybe not thought about before.

That's how it came across to me.

And so he really was having
to sort of dig deep and think about it

in relation
to, well, do other animals do this?

And does it make sense

if we've evolved to be social creatures,

why go and do something so solitary?

I, I suppose.

I don't know, but we'll hear from Molayo

It sounded like you were struggling
a little bit there

to piece together what you wanted to say.

But what I did hear in it was

when you said about - I’m looking at my notes,
that's why

I'm looking across here.

When you talked about

maybe people different
differently experience the risk of death.

And I thought that was very interesting.

And I was well aware
that almost certainly the

the conversation
could have gone on longer.

But we, we blocked it because we knew
we had a chunk of time each with you.

But I could see that there

was a continuing conversation
that could have been developed there

because you was saying
interesting things about it

And anything else from you at all?
Thomas?

No, I agree with you.

I well, I really liked
that part of the conversation.

The one thing that I didn't ask about
and which Molayo didn't mention

was the question
which we should ask ourselves about

whether this is a human universal
or whether

it might appear differently
in different societies.

And that's an interesting
comparative question, which, you know,

I guess from the point of view
of human sciences, we're always struggling

with the question of what's particular
or local and what's universal in general.

And, and,

and so I thought that would be
an interesting way to think about this,

this part of the question.

So but in general,
I thought Molayo did very well in this.

So, yeah, let's move to the other parts.

Amanda, what did you think? Right.

Should we do that before we see what
Molayo thinks about this part?

Yes. So

I referred to gene editing
because his UCAS statement had said

he'd been involved in a project
and he presented some material at school

and I was just interested
to hear his thoughts

about any ethical considerations
in gene editing.

I mentioned it because he mentioned it
in his form, so I think that's important.

I didn't just pick it out of the ether.

He expressed an interest
in the ethics of gene editing.

And yes, I mean, I
he gave me answers in relation to well,

you know, the media is bigging it up
in terms of designer babies.

So I'm probing and saying, does it matter?

And I think you answered

partially in relation
to, say, moral concerns

or beliefs and so on.

So I deliberately then said
and other really biological implications.

So words to that effect
and then moved on to.

Well, and you mentioned at that point
um Molayo, you mentioned well, yes,

it could be detrimental for the gene pool.

And again, I could have expanded.

We could have had a little bit more.

But I was aware of time and we knew
we were on a 20 or 25 minute schedule.

And I wanted to get another question
in on a completely different topic.

And what I did
do, though, was I finished off on policy.

Should it
should we have policies to control it?

And I very much liked your answer
in relation to cystic fibrosis,

which comes up quite often as well.

This is a very sort of,
you know, damaging disorder.

Maybe that is something
that we should maybe try to gene edit

so that the individual is born
and doesn't have the cystic fibrosis.

But I really like the fact that you said

but actually people
with cystic fibrosis have spoken out

and they've

said, well, look, it is part of me.

It is to me a valuable part of me.

It was an interesting
I think the thing that you should say,

because you're stepping back and saying,

well, scientists
shouldn't necessarily speak for people

or often think that they know
what is right for people.

So I thought that was really

a good answer that you thought about

On to life expectancy. Yes.

I mean, there are dozens
and dozens of reasons

why the life expectancy is different
between men and women.

You mentioned men
put themselves more at risk.

There are many other social factors
as well.

You thought maybe there were genetic ones.

I didn't probe that particularly.

But you moved on to
when I sort of asked you

for more information, you thought maybe
women had healthier eating habits.

For example,

you thought when I again,

go deeper into social class, you said

you thought there would be a difference.

There would be a social class gradient

because it will basically, income
will affect behaviours.

And the example you chose was food.

So nutrition
and money is the one that you thought of

and then again,
we could have had a lovely long

conversation about that,
but there wasn't time.

And so I finished with, well,
do you think this would be

a kind of a worldwide universal phenomenon

that women live longer than men

and you thought very much
on the cultural side

that it's going to depend very much on
not so much

the biology of the person,
but the culture of the person

affecting

their life
and their chances and their choices.

Those are my words, not yours.

But that's what you were saying. So

I probed on

two different topics,
and I thought you followed me well

You,

You picked up
exactly what the question was about.

You were able to answer me

in a relaxed and calm way.

And I'm sure.

But we're going to find out now. I expect

if this was a real interview, you would go

you would leave the room and say,
oh, I didn't think of so and such.

And I could have said this
and I could have said that.

And that is inevitable.

I mean, that's always going to happen.

You know, if you've only got a few minutes
later on, you're going to think, well,

if I had half an hour,
I could have said so much more.

And so that's always perfectly okay.

So I think we got answers
which were perfectly acceptable

in the time we gave you,

but we need to

hear it all from your point of view.

So we go back to the top again? 
Yeah.

Sure.

So I think basically with the part
which Thomas led,

I found, I think I found the beginning
quite interesting.

And I think I was able to engage
very well with that.

But then, as you mentioned,

when you brought
in the point of evolution,

I think that was a point where I was like
alarm bells always start to ring, was

how do I approach this
from that perspective?

And I found it really challenging question
in a good way.

But I think then I had to take
a bit of a pause early start

to think about that, think about it
from different perspectives.

I think in my head
I was very much thinking of lineage

and thinking about
like evolutionary trees.

And I think I got a bit too stuck in
thinking about it from that perspective.

But I wasn't then able to maybe tie
in some of the broader

themes of evolution that we discussed.

And then in the second section, I think
I was also, I think I was a bit sad.

I didn't actually
when I made the differentiation

between theistic and nontheistic,

I think that was probably to simplify
and maybe adding in a humanistic view,

which I had actually read in a book
called Homodeus by Yuval Noah Harari.

That's a little recommendation.

And that was actually

I think they discussed gene editing
in the light of like humanism as well.

And so it was actually a bit
disappointing in hindsight.

To think, Oh I could have mentioned
that as well, but I did enjoy that too.

And yeah, I think overall, I think all the

all the interview questions
were quite challenging and stimulating.

I really enjoyed it. 
Thanks Molayo.

I wanted to ask you to
what extent you thought

you might have been
answering the questions,

having had the benefit of a year
or two in human sciences already,

and to what extent
you think you could answer those questions

differently in the same way as a candidate
when you were thinking of applying.

So I think at the end
when I talked about cultures

and how men and women are 
different between cultures,

I think that was something
which was definitely informed

by my studies,
particularly in anthropology.

And how we talk about gender as performative

and so that was something that was
in my head when I thought about that.

But I think particularly

with what
most of what we discussed, Amanda,

I think particularly

because you use my personal statement,
that was very much things which I read

maybe three or four years ago,
which was still in my mind now.

So I think that was less even sciency.

But when, I think when we were talking
about the Free Solo, the poster,

I think that raised a few issues
around sociology

and anthropology, and then particularly
I was thinking about altitude.

That's something that comes up
in the first year in the physiology part,

of course, which is something
that came to mind as well.

So you think maybe
that may not have come to you

if, if you'd been asked that

first time ‘round?

Okay, no that's interesting.

But did you feel
any of the questions were unfair

or unfriendly or pushy?

No, I think they were
they were completely fair and probing,

but in a good way,

because I think when you probed, it
enabled me to actually be clearer in

what I thought as opposed to kind of skimming
the surface of the ideas.

Okay.

Well,

I mean, from our point of view, yes.

I mean, I think that did absolutely follow
exactly

the kind of line of questioning
that might come up.

And what we got from you
as a candidate was very much

considered answers, thoughtful answers.

And, you know, you picked up the board
and you ran with it.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

It's also worth mentioning that, you know,
every year the questions will be different.

Different colleagues at different colleges
will ask very different questions.

And these are questions
that are not designed to trip you up.

They are questions
that are designed to show how you think.

And if you've been shortlisted
for an interview at Oxford,

it means that you're very capable.

Everybody's smart and brilliant,
and we're, we're looking for qualities

in a student who will thrive at a place
like Oxford in this tutorial modality.

So I thought that our conversation
today was very

demonstrative of that,
and, Molayo, I thought you did very well.

And we look very much forward
to more applications

from fantastic candidates.