Paul Bloom on the Psychology of Children, and the Morality of Empathy and Disgust

26:16But say two, three years from now, what percentage of therapy done do you think will be done with humans rather than LLMs? Because the LLM is free and you can stay at home. You can with the therapist with Zoom, but the LLM is super easy. If you include by therapy, somebody just regularly talking to LLM about their problems and getting some advice and everything, I think that human interaction within not too many years will be the minority of interactions. I think people will be very drawn to AI therapists. There's some evidence that we have a prejudice against AIs. There was a paper recently that gave the same sort of response, the exact same response, to two groups of people, told one of them it's a person, the other one it's an AI.

27:04The people told it was an AI said, oh, that wasn't very empathic, that wasn't very understanding. But my feeling is this prejudice will fade over time and it's mostly people more R age than people who are 18 or 20. The people who are best at working with LLMs, what kind of psychological intelligence do you think they have? Who's going to be good at that? I think you need a certain flexibility, a certain degree of patience, and you need to develop a theory of mind with LLMs that is different from the theory of mind you need for people. So, I was recently asked Claude, who I, Claude Claude, anyway, I use it, I use it a lot, And I asked it, I said, there's a phenomenon in children I found is the same phenomena show up in adults.

27:50And I said, and I was, and I was, and I, and I planly framed the question that I wanted to answer to be yes. And I said, yes, there it is. Here are three papers that show it, you know, decisively. None of the papers were real. It hallucinated it because it's what I wanted. And then I went back and I said, look, I'll lose my job if you give me papers that are, that are false, that are made up. You've got to be accurate on a big trouble. Then it did much better. So you got to gain them to some extent in a very different way than you'd game a person and that Capacity is something which I think is essential for de -on's at least for the current models Here's a simple question What's the best test of whether someone or something has a theory of mind?

28:32I think conversation I think a sustained convert so you know that there are technical tests like the false belief task or reading the mind and the eyes task. But those are easily gained. Those are, LLMs will succeed on them because they've seen thousands and thousands of instances on them. I think in conversation, if a lack of theory of mind quickly reveals itself. So success at solving a sort of turning test is a success of theory of mind. Well, but cloud three can converse very well, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't have a theory of mind Do you think it does? Well, I'm using theory of mind, a word like theory of mind, meaning the manifestation as if it did.

29:12Does it really think that other people have minds? Does it have a model of people's psychology? When it says, I understand exactly what you're feeling, does it sort of call back its own experiences? I doubt it. So maybe in some way you're asking an even easier question, which is, what will show that it has consciousness. But you could have consciousness and not a theory of mind, right? Yes, but you were saying I think that to have theory of mind involves something you might call consciousness. But what's the extra thing above having consciousness that indicates a person has a theory of mind? So we reject the false belief test.

29:47That makes sense to me. What is it then? What's the test? I think what you'd have to do and you could do this on a flyer. You could work it out. would be develop, well, okay, here's a good test. Read it half of a good novel and then ask what's going on here, what's going to happen next. Show it half of a TV episode. And when we do these things, our theory of mind is just fully operational. We say that detective is going to get his revenge because he will not take that sort of stuff. And she's going to leave him the first moment she has a chance, and I think that shows theory of mind that work.

30:26And if you do it in that way, you can't cheat. If it's a novel, novel or a novel episode, then it would have to do it on a fly. I'm afraid I'm going to fail that test. I always think up strange imaginary endings that are improbable, and occasionally they come to pass. And I think my endings are often much better than what they end up putting on the screen. My dad is great when we watch TV to get as a kid. And of course the TV was very different and much more predictable. But I carried a review about to say something and then he would say it. He would say it's signaled, Hanesley was like, my wife does this too.

31:02Yeah, she's great at this. Yeah. Do monkeys have cognitive dissonance? Wife done some research suggesting that they might have a sort. The cognitive dissonance, the sort of cognitive dissonance we were interested in, is that when we choose something, thing. That makes you say out of a choice of two things. That makes you like it more and makes you like the things that you didn't choose less. And some work with Laurie Santos who had a thriving monkey lab, we found a compoutions did the same thing. We also found three year olds did the same thing. Endowment effects, right? That's a separate thing.

31:38But I think there's some evidence that monkeys also show endowment effects. Are we sure that's dissonance? Then, down into effects, I'm less sure that it's dissonance. It might, there's alternative explanations. The favoring that which you chose is kind of a textbook example of dissonance. That's dissonance if anything is. But what if you want to carry a story with you, of what it meant to you, and your act of choosing helped create and define the story, and you value things through the scenario to function, and you actually ought to be that way. Is that so improbable? No, no. I guess the experiments that test it aren't open to that kind of interpretation.

32:20It can often be like, you know, we give you two M &Ms and you just choose one at random. And then later when you rank the taste of the M &Ms, you'd say, oh, the one I picked is taste year, then the one I didn't pick. Well, if we simply handed it to you, you wouldn't get that effect. So there's not much of a narrative to that. But I agree that when you get and more complicated in life, it could serve all sorts of other functions. How much does formal education boost IQ? The data are a little bit, each year you're in school, your IQ goes a little bit up, and the skeptics will say, I think Brian Kaplan says, you know, you get better taking tests, you get better at sort of a scholastic way of thinking.

33:02I do think though that education period does play a role in making you smarter. It gives you practice and dealing with abstractions, with hypotheticals, just sort of things that we often do as markers of intelligence. Do people overestimate or underestimate your intelligence? You. My own? Yeah. You must know. It's in either a way it's a humiliating answer, but I would imagine, particularly when I I think they overestimate it. People sometimes ask me questions about domains, which I have no knowledge about, and they take me seriously about that, isn't that an overestimation? What about you? Oh, they weigh overestimate my intelligence, but they underestimate how much I know.

33:46It's interesting. I know a lot, and they mistake that for innate intelligence. It's what happens in my case. So you know even more than you seem to know, which is quite a lot. In my opinion, so I'm being like both modest and not modest with each part of the answer. But I think I take good care to try to apply what I know and people mistake that for again, high IQ. It's not entirely clear that it isn't high IQ, that IQ might be largely built on the scaffolding of a lot of knowledge. Partly, yeah. But it's something else as well. There's some kind of G where I think I'm actually much weaker. Maybe there's a trade -off, which is the more knowledge you have, the less G you need to get to the same point where somebody with less knowledge would need a lot of G to get to that point.

34:30And why do you think it's worked out the way it has that people overestimate your intelligence? Because you are a Yale? Yeah, prestige bias. I'm a university professor. I may yell, maybe I benefit from other forms of privilege being, you know, an older white man. But I don't know. But I show all the markers of a smart guy. Do you think when you interact with other people that you're too much impressed by their intelligence or not enough too much? because a lot of smart people overvalue smarts and others. And why not just drive that out if you're calculus? Is it so hard? No, I read your talent book and it was actually very, very useful to me because it taught me other ways, other things to look for.

35:11When it comes to choosing graduate students, for instance, I tend to rank intelligence very highly and you know a good conversation with someone who's quicker than me and smart under a feet and everything. I valued that very highly. It's only recently I started to try to also value things like productivity and work ethic and other things and a certain degree of creativity, but I would just, I go too much for smarts. What do you think is psychologically the hardest trait for us to value properly? Disagreableness or something else? Because after all, they might be disagreeing with you, right? Yeah, disagreeableness.

35:51Probably honesty. One of the tropes on social media, I hate the most. Just when somebody says, you know, well, here I am and now I'm a professor and I want to say to somebody who was my advisor many years ago said I'd never make it. Well, you're a jerk and everybody laughs at the person said they'd never make it. And to be honest with somebody, and in that case, they were wrong, but even if you're right, people hate you. To be honest with somebody when they say to you, what do you think of my book? Do you think I'm suited for this job? stuff like that can be doing them a huge service. Am I with the right person?

36:25Can be doing them a huge service and the reward you will get is hatred and resentment. So on your substacks, small potatoes, you wrote a post on doing academic interviews. The interviewers at a general level, what's the bias they're most likely to have? Oh, all sorts of biases. And I'm almost leaning towards, you know, your book aside, jettising interviews sometimes, getting rid of them. But all sorts of biases. They're biased by, they're biased by charm, they're biased by quickness, they're biased by flattery. And in fact, my advice, part of my advice to put it, somewhat cynically is for people on job interviews, know the person you're talking to, do their research, because it's kind of flattering.

37:09You know, somebody comes into my office and said, oh my god, it's such an honor to me. I read against empathy and I changed my life. I don't want it to sway me, but it's hard for it not to. Yeah, that's our weakness. I've wondered quite often, why is flattery under -supplied in these contexts? Because by no means does everyone do it. It's not very costly. Even if you're not fully believed, it can have a positive impact on the person. So why isn't the supply of flattery just way, way up there? Every job interview. That's a cheap thing. Yeah, it starts off with, oh, I read your articles two years ago.

37:45it was wonderful to change how I think about tax incidents, but not every interview starts that way. Most do not. Why not? I tell the story in my sub stack of very famous senior interview, comes to figure, I never met him before, comes to my house, oh my god, it is such a delight to me, you, and talks all about my work extensively. And I fully knew, even my ego was not so, I fully knew he read up on me, but it still felt great. It still felt, I don't know. I feel maybe people are uncomfortable flattering. Maybe there's an awkwardness when you're talking to somebody who is of a higher status than you and you want to Java.

38:22Maybe it feels inappropriate to flatter like who am I to tell this person their worth is great. I don't know. You still think they ought to do it more, right? I do. I do. I do. There should be. There's a flattery shortage in the world. And it's going back to kind of a criticism abundance sometimes where I think people have a false theory of mind where they go to somebody and they say, you know, I read your stuff and I think it's really poorly thought out. It could be very helpful from a friend, not a good tactic when you're looking for a job. So how can we train people to be better flatterers?

38:57What do we need to do? Maybe it's some degree of sort of theory of mind, which is you just ask people, how do you feel when somebody tells you how wonderful you are? I think that that will help them do it. It doesn't seem like a very difficult thing to pick up. So I don't know, it's a mystery. So if we should train flattery, how do you think we should best tax empathy? In the broad sense of tax, right? Yeah. Yeah. I think we should tax empathy through social disapproval. And here's what I'm thinking. A lot of American politicians say racist things and have racist policies, but almost always they cloak it.

39:36They dog whistle it, they cloak it. Maybe they aren't even aware of it themselves, because if, if, when somebody says something about a valid clearly racist, people boo them. People, they, they, they, they, they suffer a huge social cost. I'd like to see the same thing with regard to overt displays of empathy. So I would like to see that, you know, when, when a politician comes up and says, I want to talk about the healthcare plan. I says, I want to read you a letter I got from an a year old who told me the story about her father, I wanted to audit the crowd to boo. And the show don't treat us like children.

40:10I think empathy could easily be used as a tool for all sorts of things. And if we stop putting up with it, it would discourage it. Where is the empathy problem worse? Canada or the United States? I think everything is both worse and better in the United States. Just broader variants. There's broader variance to politics as more intense is a lot more interesting. I think the degree of sort of empathic pandering as well as the degree of everything else is more accelerated in the states. I think part of Canadian politics with parliament encourages more vibrant debate and discussion. Often at a pretty high level that you don't see in the states.

40:52Do you think there are any humans who are what I would call truly a egalitarian? So there's plenty of people who genuinely want to redistribute wealth, but typically I think they have other status markers. It could be intellect, it could be empathy, it could be a certain kind of left -wing politics. Are there people who are genuinely egalitarian across all dimensions? No, I think you cease to become a person. in the future, indifferent between your child and a stranger, to not care about somebody's looks or intelligence or kindness, you could imagine a LLM program for that, but I think when we encountered a LLM, we'd find it repellent.

41:35And the person would discuss us. Yes. That's the case where a disgust might be useful, right? Yes. Okay, you have a few gump full circle on me. Yes. Why do so many people enjoy horror movies? For the most part, I do not. I'll interject, but clearly many do. Do you enjoy any movies that scare you of a lighter sort? Not gory, not chainsaw stuff, but later. That I enjoy. So Darth Vader comes on the screen. I wouldn't say I'm scared, but I feel the negative evil presence, and I respond to that in an aesthetically positive way. Yeah, I think that that's right, where we take some sort of pleasure from negative emotions, but like sadness and fear and disgust and even guilt shame.

42:21But there's a lot of variation in which emotions people like. Some people like a good cry, some people like to scream, and the intensity of it, where I do like scary movies. But for me, it's like the Baba Duke or something like, or you know, it follows. The gory ones, I can't bear to watch. I think there's different sources for our appetite for them. But one is it might reflect what sometimes been called safe practice where our minds are drawn to worst -case scenarios as a way to practice encountering them. You know, an analogy I like is that is that of a flight simulator, which you got a flight simulator, you would often program it for difficult situations to get you practiced and to coping with the meek item in real life.

43:04And sometimes I think our enjoyment of fiction and fantasy is sort of like running off a flight simulator. You've posed this question in your work as a hypothetical, is consenting sex between adult siblings morally wrong? What's your view? Yes. Why do you think it's morally wrong? Why? Because although as adults, there's a strong supposition that they're free to do what they want, I think that the problem is that when they're not adults, the fact that later on they can have sex and worse say between say a stepfather and a stepdaughter or Some other or an ununcle and a niece the idea that sex is a possibility in the future when your adults Carodes the relationship early on does that make sense?

43:52This is my this is my utilitarian attempt to try to do a cost benefit analysis for what you are gonna Accus me of being a disc of having a discussed reaction I think you have a discussed reaction. That's fine It sounds to me like an argument that it's imprudent, which can slide into morally wrong. But I still think there's something out of sync between the strength of our discussed reaction and the degree of moral wrongness It has. I think I think that's right. I think that that if that was my argument say make it make it just Ratchet it up a bit and make it a relationship between a father and adult daughter But say brother sister.

44:28I could reword the question adult sibling. I said siblings So, brother and sister or two sisters for that matter. Yeah. That seems much less wrong than the stepfather and the daughter. It does. It does because in some way going back to my point about, as it brings us down to childhood, there's less of a power asymmetry. There's less of a case of an adult carefully grooming a child so that when she is of age, they could then have sex and it would be okay. I have a visceral response to it. I'll give another argument, which is again, trying not to be discussed space, which is that I think that there's a range of human relationships that are tremendously valuable.

45:06And sometimes they're better off without sex. I think it's, you know, the relationship, certain sex is great, connects to romance, connects to sort of a great degree of intimate relationships. But some relationships are sex -free, like relationship between most people and their adult children. And that's good. Now is a CWT listener, might you be up for a round of overrated versus underrated? Yeah, I was hoping for this, hit me. Okay, these are all easy. Sean Piaget, overrated or underrated? Underrated. He is wrong in just about everything he said about kids. There's been studies finding that all, just about every claim he makes is mistaken and overridden, but he was a great scientist with a great, encompassing theory, a lot of his theoretical foundations, particularly the notion that children are like scientists exploring the world, have stood the test of time.

46:00Also, it was a sweet guy. Unlike Freud, he was, you know, he was, he was a genuinely decent guy. So I'd say he's underrated. The notion of mirror neurons, oh, it shouldn't be rated at all. So it's just false, right? I'm not enough of a neuroscience to say it's entirely dead. Maybe and people have talked about marijuana neurons in primates being involved in certain aspects of motor learning and I'm not expert enough to say that that's all bogus. But was once hugely overrated in that this was the solution to everything. Explain autism, explain language, learning, explain empathy and the whole feel I think crash and if people and it's still overrated because some people don't know what crash.

46:43That wasn't easy one. So she epaths overrated or underrated. You mean that's hard, right? You mean the idea or the people? No, the actual ones. They're very productive. I pull out of them, right? They are. They are. I think they're overrated. I think there's a sort of sexiness to this. There was a woman who was profiled in New York Times recently who described herself as a sociopath or a psychopath. I read that. And I don't know. I think there's a lot of alert to a lot of drama. Many studies of psychopaths and sociopaths find that they're actually often below normal intelligence. They tend to be depressed.

47:23They're more likely to kill themselves. They kind of live lousy lives. They're not the sort of sexy conscience -free people we like to imagine. Suggesting that some degree, that you and I, the non -sociopaths, are sensitive to this. And when we see a sociopath, we kind of run away. You're assuming I'm an on -soshium path, right? Oh, I know you well from the podcast. But a lot of people just think they're psychopaths, like they're all serial killers, and that's not true at all. So maybe they lack a moral sense, but if they can learn to behave according to incentives, maybe a lot just fit in. They learn how to flatter, say, because they're not held back by these other weird feelings that you shouldn't flatter your interviewer.

48:07You could get very far, but the thing about the people we want to be around is we want them to be nice to us even when incentives aren't present. Carl Jung overrated or underrated? Oh, yeah, hardly, hardly rated at all these days. I think maybe just because of Jordan Peterson who has been, been promoting him, I often get people saying, why didn't you talk about Carl Jung in your book? I would say, I'll say underrated in that what little I know about him seems quite interesting. And I think maybe he's been so eclipsed by Freud that nobody gives his ideas any attention. Certain ideas about some of his ideas about a conscious or worse study.

48:47So mildly underrated. Memory, streams and recollections is a great book, I think. And I believe with LLMs, Jung will make a comeback. In a sense, LLMs are tapping into a kind of Jungian subconscious of all the data we've put out there. A sort of collective unconscious is now coming online. But there's reinforcement learning applied to it. So it's also suppressed in a kind of Freudian way. So you get this weird mix of young and Freud in contemporary LLMs. There's a book, there's a book there somewhere. Yeah. Asian tiger parenting over or underrated. Ha. Amy Chua, who is a friend of mine who brought the idea in her battle hand with a tiger mother.

49:30I think underrated, I tend to be a rather permissive parent, but the thing about it is a lot of these tiger parents end up with kids who are not merely successful, but happy and love their parents. So it doesn't work for everybody, either for either not for every kid, nor for every parent. I could not fashion myself as a tiger dad, but I think we should take it more seriously. Do you need the whole community for it to work? Oh, yes. Yes. It's like everything else, you know, cell phones, smartphones and social media and, I don't know, sex, alcohol, where if you're one individual within a community doing it, it's extremely difficult.

50:15It's much easier to be any sort of parent if everybody else around you is the same sort of parent. Big five personality theory. Oh, underrated. It stood the test of time. And often when people complain about the replication crisis, they throw away all of psychology. But personality psychology has proven surprisingly robust. And I think there's a lot of sense and idea. I know you actually were somewhat critical of this in your book Talents, the idea of the Big Five. But the idea that you could characterize somebody in terms of sort of five numbers determining their openness and their conscientiousness and so on.

50:51What do you think on that? I think it's overrated by people who use it in hiring, but I still think in general it's somewhat underrated, so we're maybe not far apart. People who don't know about the categories at all would do well to learn them. That's how I would put it. Yes, and once you know about them, you should be flexible and not take them too too seriously. What's an neglected classic in psychology that more people should read? Well, psychologists don't read. We don't read books. We don't read anything from the past. But you read. I have gone through my adult life, my whole life without ever reading principles of psychology by William James.

51:30And then a couple of friends of mine invited me on their podcast to talk about his chapter on habit. And I read it and then blew me away. It's an incredible book. It's an incredible book. It was well written. It is sharp. He talks about instinct, you talk to it, it is a very contemporary voice. He's a lyrical, beautiful writer and it's full of insights. And maybe it's an embarrassment to psychology that you can use it for an intro -psych class and you would gain a lot. Why do religious people cry when their loved ones die? Assuming they believe in heaven, of course, not all religions do. Yeah, I think the answer is more...

52:08So some people say, and I have atheists and say, well, they're hypocrites. They don't really believe in heaven. If they really believed in heaven, they wouldn't cry. They would rejoice. And the same thing when they're out with their own death. I think there's belief in there's belief. I could have a very confident belief in heaven. Maybe I'm even 100 % sure that I'll go to heaven when I die. But when faced with my own death, there are other systems that lead to tremendous fear. And when faced with the death of somebody I love, there are other systems in the head that could lead to terrible grief.

52:39So we're not unitary beings. It's possible for upon learning my son as a terminal disease, for part of me think, oh, he'll be reunited and God and heaven be paradise and feel good about it and feel horrible grief. And yes, they can flick with one another, but that doesn't mean this isn't the gate existence of either one. What does the Hebrew Bible most get right and wrong about social psychology? So it has a mehetic desire, right? Peter Tiel will tell us that. I mean, how good is it as a kind of text and social psychology? I think it's a great text and social psychology and personality psychology and even a little bit of cognitive psychology.

53:19It captures in a very stark way the us them biases that are present. that social psychology makes so much out of it. Capture this idea of prejudice, of capture this idea of thinking about men and women, children and adults in group out group separately. I've been very interested, I've long been interested in the portrayal of God in the Hebrew Bible, which is absolutely fascinating because people who haven't read it think, oh, you know, God, all knowing, all loving and everything. But in fact, it's this wonderful character. And this goes beyond social psychology, He was sort of talking about internal workings of the mind.

53:59I wrote in my sub -stack about a Passover story where he sets the plagues loose in a pharaoh unless he lets the Jews go. And pharaoh says, fine, fine, fine. And then the pharaoh bends, breaks and says, fine, you win. And then God fiddles with the pharaoh's mind and this wonderful twist to say, to make him refuse. And he says later, I wanted to show off my powers. We had gotten this far. It's like, I don't say invasion of Iraq or something. It's just, it's their lovely stories there. I think it's brilliant on the mentality of winers, like a book of Job, even Moses at times. You should write a book on social psychology in the Hebrew Bible.

54:41That's an idea. You know what I like? God has so much patience for winers in that there's so many scenes where God destroys people who dislike his lack of faith with him. When it comes to Moses pushing back, I don't want to do this, you know. Guys, okay, let's compromise. Or about the just he ends up negotiating over how many when he destroys the world in the flood, over how many people to leave behind. If you wind the God as Job did, sometimes he listens. What do you, Paul Bloom, Maximize. Most recently, time with those I love, that's what I try. Also time writing my sub stack. The ones you love, they're all busy right now and that's your talking to me.

55:25That's right. Well, you could, they all turned you down, right? Well, you know, our relationship is just beginning. Who knows? That's right. But I, I, I maximize different things than I did when I, when I was younger. I, I try to maximize money less. I still take money very seriously because you know, want to renovate our house, want to travel and stuff like that. But I've been very lucky to have deep connections with friends and my wife with my children who are now adults. And I sometimes have to remind myself, you end up forgetting that this is what I ultimately want to maximize. And what's your most unusual successful work habit?

56:03No, this is, this is an easy one as you, as you, as you, they're all easy in this, in this episode. No, the one about lessons from social psychology from the Hebrew Bible was not an easy one. My honest work habit is that I work on not always, but often in six -minute bursts. So I have a whiteboard right next to me. I'll work on a substack for six minutes, then a reference letter for six minutes, and I'll rush and fold my laundry for six minutes, and then I'll answer email for six minutes, go on social media for six minutes, and then do this for ten more things, and go back to the sub -stack and repeat, and then three, four hours will go by.

56:38I don't recommend it for everybody. And that's an approximation, or you've said it like a timer, or is the timing internal? Not an approximate, I have a timer. I try it when I timer beeps, I could be mid -word. I'll stop and go on to the next. And for me, A, I have very short, this keeps me from getting bored. And also, by stopping mid -word, or stopping wherever I'm stopping, when I go back to it, the energy is still there to want to continue. I highly recommend it to everybody. I've advocated a similar system that you should stop writing each day before you feel you're done. Yes, that's right.

57:13That's right. When you don't want to stop, you're just about to write something really good. That's when no more. Yes, back to it tomorrow. Many people do the opposite. They have nice closure on this side. They ended the paragraph, they ended the chapter, and then it's hard to start up next time. That's right. Yeah. Excellent advice. And they're a little exhausted. Very last question. What will you do next? I'm thinking I want to write a new book, but I'm not exactly sure of the topic. I've been playing around different topics. I have something which I kind of like, but it's too early for me to talk about.

57:45But I really want to write a new book. And what's the algorithm you use to decide which topic it will be? Well, for this book, I started to write a proposal on an idea and I just couldn't make it interesting enough. It just so, so because I work by writing a proposal and sending to my agent and so on, often if I could write a good proposal, then I know I have a good book. Not that the book's going to match the proposal in any interesting sense, but it means that the material, the material is there. I guess another way of putting it is by the time I'm done with that, I know it'll be a good book or a good book for me if I couldn't move up without writing it.

58:23If nobody wanted it, I'd write it anyway. Paul Bloom, thank you very much. And listeners, you can buy all of Paul's books. And again, his new sub -stack is Small Potatoes. Just Google Paul Bloom BL -O -O -M Small Potatoes. Thank you, Paul. Thank you, Tyler. That was great. Thanks for listening to Conversations with Tyler. You can subscribe to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app. If you like this podcast, please consider giving us a rating and leaving a review. This helps other listeners find the show. On Twitter, I'm Attyler Cowan and the show is At Cowan Convose.

59:05Until next time, please keep listening and learning.