October QnA!

Transcript

This transcript was generated automatically and may contain errors — the audio is the record.

0:00:13 Thomas: Hello and welcome to Serious Inquiries Only. This is the October Q&A spooktacular. I think we have to add, I'm contractually obligated to add spook-tacular to that, so we'll, we'll also, but it, you know, it's not even, I shouldn't even call it an obligation. It's my privilege to add add spooktacular to that. Yes, Absolutely. Um, I was just looking at the, the image I've been using Dolly to, uh, make podcast art. Sometimes it's a little frustrating because it won't, there's, I think you're not allowed to use like real people and there's other rules they have that I'm finding really annoying and I wish they would stop being cowards. Like, just let me, let me pay for a premium Dolly subscription that lets me do fucking whatever I want and

0:00:25 Lindsey: Absolutely. Yep. And delight, I assume.

0:01:03 Lindsey: Mm-hmm.

0:01:04 Thomas: Then let me sign off on the wave. Like, I'll, I'll sign off onto like if something is a problem, I'll be responsible. It's, yeah.

0:01:11 Lindsey: I got it to generate an image of Freud and an image of Robin Williams if I told it that it was a painting. I just wouldn't do them as photos.

0:01:12 Thomas: Okay. Okay, good to know, but In this Q&A, I had a skeleton asking that question, uh, and

0:01:22 Lindsey: Yeah. I did enjoy that. It was

0:01:30 Thomas: But It's All like weirdly, you know, see, uh, whatever, computer. It's not quite, it's not quite right, but that's, that makes it more fun. Yeah.

0:01:30 Lindsey: Nice. Yeah. Part of charm.

0:01:39 Thomas: All right, well, let's get to, we've got October questions, and then also if, um, we are able to get through all those, we have a few from September that we didn't get to that we could, uh, follow up on. So I'm, I'm excited for that. First question from WindyCityRoger, truly the Teresa Gomez of SIO. Oh, man, it's going to be hard to come up with a question based on the image. Tentative question, craziest teacher story, bonus points if it happened in science class. What do you got for us?

0:01:52 Lindsey: Mm-hm. Indeed.

0:02:06 Lindsey: Do you have one? I do have one while you're thinking, If you want. Yeah, so I think one of the most memorable things that has ever happened to me in class was watching my stats professor, Dr. Larry Toothaker. This guy's in his like 70s, I think, he Yeah, Larry Toothaker.

0:02:12 Thomas: Sure.

0:02:25 Thomas: Toothacre? No, that's not. If you're to make up a story, come up với Larry Toothacre.

0:02:32 Lindsey: Larry Toothpaker is kind of a big deal in quantitative psychology, he's He's known, um, But yeah, so he was like, he's like in his 70s, I think, um, but he's a fitness nut and he like runs marathons and stuff. Like And I watched him before class, there was an issue with a projector or something, and in my memory, and maybe this is partly distortion, but in my memory, what I watched him do was literally leap onto a desk in like a single bound so that he could check out the projector. It was crazy, like I couldn't do the physical thing that he did, just like leapt on top of it. Yeah.

0:02:38 Thomas: Oh. Okay, wow.

0:03:10 Lindsey: It was Amazing.

0:03:10 Thomas: And That's Why he's Larry Toothaker and we're not, I Think I Guess So Uh, that, I mean, I don't want to, you know, sorry to diss your story, but like if that's the craziest thing that ever happened was a teacher was like three feet higher than they normally are.

0:03:11 Lindsey: Correct. Yeah. He's Like half cat, it Was amazing, but Nobody Leapt. He He leapt. He didn't climb up. There like he was a cat or a spider cat or something. He just propelled himself straight up in the air and leapt onto the desk. It was crazy.

0:03:33 Thomas: Okay. Yeah. All Right. I Had a lot of weird substitute teacher stories from like eighth grade or so, like I had one teacher who like was, this dude, one sub was like, it was the weirdest thing, I don't know if it's just a product of the small town, weird place I was, but I only vaguely remember it, but he was, to the class was being a totally normal seventh or eighth grade class and that they didn't give a shit and weren't really paying attention and This guy was trying to tell some story about like, I, I only have the vivid image of him leaving the classroom, which was what also happened, well, ultimately happened, but the build-up to it was, I think he was trying to tell us some story about some fucking like orphans, that something, I, it was so, okay, I wish I was paying attention, but I wasn't because I was a normal seventh eighth grade kid who didn't pay pay attention in class.

He's telling some story and nobody gave a shit and it was about like orphans, that something or other, like if something missing, something, something, and then he's getting all flustered and he's like, I don't know what his name was, just fucking Mr. Guy, and

0:04:12 Lindsey: Sure.

0:04:51 Thomas: Yeah.

0:04:51 Lindsey: Mr. Substitute, yeah.

0:04:52 Thomas: Mr. Substitute, and he's like getting all flustered and he's like, and the end of the story is one of them was named Mr. Substitute, and you don't care and he just left it. Was like, I, I mean, I have no, no idea what any of that was about, because again, it was me just like come, it was one of those things that happens and you like come out of a fucking sleep and you're like, what just, what, what just Happened, and then my brain played the like playback for me and I was like, wow, he must have been telling whatever the fuck he was talking about, must have had to do with him, and he was like super offended that this group of 11 or 12 year olds didn't give a shit about whatever the, he was taking about, like, I'm sure whatever it was was a compelling story, but don't try to like get reinforcement from, you know, don't try to get your like emotional, whatever from a group of 12 year olds. It's not a good thing to do.

0:05:01 Lindsey: Whoa. Wow. Yeah. Yeah. Yikes. Yeah, no,

0:05:43 Thomas: I don't remember what happened after that. I mean, he definitely left and just like, didn't come back. And then I assume, I don'T know. I assume maybe that like the principal came and like stood there for the, until the end of the class. I DON'T KNOW. It'S kind of funny.

0:05:44 Lindsey: That is crazy.

0:05:57 Lindsey: That is pretty crazy. I

0:05:59 Thomas: To you. All right. Alexis Olson asks, would you rather transition into an AI dominated future as a cyborg or be left behind as AI transcends humanity?

0:06:10 Lindsey: Mean, I've been fantasizing for a long time about reverting to a more communal, low-tech, post-apocalyptic kind of lifestyle. So that sounds great to me. Yeah.

0:06:18 Thomas: What? Which one is that? That's not one of the options so the option is you just die, that's not one of them, the option is you be a cyborg or you just get left behind and die, essentially, is about how I understand it.

0:06:20 Lindsey: Wait, what? What?

0:06:34 Lindsey: Oh, I didn't interpret the second option as dying. I thought that, you know, AI just leaves us behind. And so we're left in like a low- tech sort of...

0:06:41 Thomas: Okay. I guess that's, yeah, all right, so you're, you're picturing like some sort of settlement of low-tech anti-AI people that farms and communes and and then dies because, because you're not a cyborg, you weak human. See you later, meatbag. I'll be in my cyborg body.

0:06:50 Lindsey: Yeah. Yeah, candles, that kind of thing. Wow. Okay.

0:07:01 Thomas: Living a long time. I'll come visit. And then I'll go to the gym. I'll been 20,000 years because I'm a cyborg. And I'll think, oh, shit. I should have looked at my cyborgs watch. And I'm going like, damn it. Those fucking flesh bags already died. Oh, well. I used to like one of those flesh bags. But now that I'm cyborg. Oh, wow. They're dead.

0:07:10 Lindsey: Mm-hmm. Yeah! Yeah. I, I would say that I was going to be sad about that, but I'll be dead for like 20,000 years. So it's fine.

0:07:25 Thomas: Yeah. Yeah. By then you probably would have gotten over it.

0:07:29 Lindsey: Probably.

0:07:30 Thomas: I don't mind. I've said this before, but I wouldn't mind just if we're going to do like the cyborg, I wouldn'T mind if they could freeze me my brain state or something and just, you know, every thousand years just just wake me up for a little bit. And I just want to see what's going on and just be like, hey, what's what's what's gone on? Trump's still a problem or like, yeah, some fucking hell. Yes. Trump is it's the three thousand twenty two right now. And Trump is still a pain in our ass. I don't know how that happened. I think that would be interesting. And then you could just, you know, till the end of the fucking galaxy.

I I really here's what I want to know. I would love to know what happens ultimately, obviously, to humanity. I guess that's a very basic way of saying it, but like, I'm curious, whatever zillion years from now, when the sun is starting to fucking go, I want to know what's, what's going to happen. Are we already gone by then? Probably. Or is there some way we continued? And then they're like, oh, we're getting back. You remember we marked our calendars and, you know, billion years ago that the sun was going to explode. And yeah, that's coming up. And what are we going to do? I'm just curious. Like, what will that look like? We'll be a whole

0:07:50 Lindsey: Yeah. That would be interesting.

0:08:46 Lindsey: Yeah,

0:08:46 Thomas: Different species. Will we have, you know, like evolved to the point where we're completely, will we be AI maybe? I don't know. It'd be interesting.

0:08:54 Lindsey: That is interesting.

0:08:54 Thomas: I just want to know those answers. I don't know if I'm interested in like living forever. I dunno. All right. Maybe I, I don'T what else is going on. I mean, whatever. Like, yeah. Okay. I DON'T, people are always like, I wouldn't want to live forever. So yeah. Like I don't know. I guess I'm pretty ambivalent. Like I, I'm 50, 50 between like, yeah, either no, don't live forever, live forever.

0:08:54 Lindsey: Yeah.

0:09:18 Lindsey: That's interesting.

0:09:19 Thomas: It's kind of a, yeah.

0:09:19 Lindsey: Okay. I don't, I don'T hear a lot of ambivalence about the immortality question. Um, I'm kind of with you on that sort of, I dunno, I'M really looking forward to the fact that there's an end point to all this. So IT'S giving that up.

0:09:30 Thomas: You say that now, but

0:09:31 Lindsey: I do, I do say that now yeah all

0:09:32 Thomas: Like, you know, I don't know. I think it's, it's if you could skip the part where everyone, you know, died, you know, like that would be the rough part. If for some reason other people around you weren't continuing on, that wouldn't be great. But if it was like, if it was like a Bobiverse thing, like we covered on Philosophers in Space where it's like, you die and then they bring you back, and when they bring you back they're, you know, already everybody you knew was dead, then I'd be like, alright I mean, the options are do nothing and do not exist, or maybe, uh, you know, play some robot basketball or something like, I'll play some Robot Basketball why not?

0:09:40 Lindsey: Right you've convinced me, yeah.

0:10:11 Thomas: What's the downside? I don't know, you can always check out later. All right. Patrick Orlob, I think we've covered everything on that one. Patrick Orlobs asks, would you rather transition into a skeleton dominated future as a, is it lick? I never know what that word is. Is it lich? I can never, I don't know. I've only read it, but it's like the, you know, like lich king or whatever, like those skeleton things. Or be left behind as the undead transcend humanity, which is a fantastic send up of the previous question based on my skeleton picture. And I think a skeleton-dominated future would be pretty cool.

0:10:12 Lindsey: True no idea yeah that's true, yeah, actually being undead feels like, I, I would be interested in experiencing that. I think, um, I think that would be cool. It sounds like

0:10:58 Thomas: My body couldn't get any worse, you know? As it rotted off my bones, I'd like, oh, thank God. No more indigestion. Just bones. I know

0:11:00 Lindsey: Yeah it does sound nice, just to be bones, doesn't it?

0:11:11 Thomas: I've said this before, but one of my favorite Phoebe moments was, it was in this house, actually. Or maybe not. Anyway, it's a year or two ago or something. And she had just like kind of learned about skeletons, or like we had a book that had a picture of a skeleton, and imagine that, imagine being a kid and you're like, that, what, that we have, we're a skeleton inside there, weird, you know, and then I, we were, we were brushing teeth or something, and she was like, "Dada, I don't want to, I don't want to eat, I don't want to eat anything." Thing. Cause I don't want it to get stuck in my bones. She's thinking like if she swallows something, it just goes into the skeleton. Like it goes straight to the skeleton, it's going to be covered, just stuck in her bones. She won't be able to get it out. Really? If it's gonna be stuck in bones, not

0:11:11 Lindsey: Right that's awesome Yeah, it is a weird thought, that's, uh, that's in there. Do you ever think about that when you're looking at a, at a human that's like talking to you or something? Do you never think about the fact that they're a skeleton? Oh.

0:12:20 Thomas: When they're talking to me, I'm usually try, try to listen, but I do, I do think about people's skeletons a lot.

0:12:23 Lindsey: Okay oh okay yeah Okay, I'm just curious. Yeah, it occurs to me sometimes that somebody's a skeleton, I

0:12:34 Thomas: Yeah. Did you ever find Bugs Bunny attractive when he put on a dress and turned into a girl? A Wayne's World quote. Okay. I don't mind if you want to call me a table, but why are you always sitting on me? Asks all the questions I have turned into, or maybe you could do this as an episode. All right. Fair enough. Anyway, recently been looking into relationship psychology and it appears a small number of prominent names, Gottman being one apparently, I don't know who that is, have dominated the discourse, but also apparently largely conceal the details of their research. Wow. So I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on proactive slash reactive relationship counseling and some Some of the other popular methods on offer. Yeah, go. I'm curious of all this. But

0:13:06 Lindsey: Will tell you, yeah We're definitely just gonna have to do an episode on this, um, but this is super interesting, and I did not realize that there, there was controversy about Gottman. So yeah, very familiar with Gottman, and obviously I'm not in that area of psychology. He did the sort of applied side of things, therapy or whatever. So I'm not in that area, but social psychology does have an entire sub-area that's concerned with close relationships, and Gottman is definitely a very prominent name in that area, even though we're outside of the counseling sphere.

0:13:51 Thomas: Can he jump onto a desk?

0:13:54 Lindsey: Unlikely. Not like Larry Toothaker, for sure, um, but yeah, so I, I think that this has come up before in a past episode. Do you remember talking about the four horsemen of the relationship apocalypse? Yeah.

0:13:55 Thomas: Okay. Oh, that sounds familiar.

0:14:06 Lindsey: So Gotman, is that guy, he

0:14:08 Thomas: Well, what is that? I don't, I'm not sure I remember.

0:14:09 Lindsey: Yeah, So He did a study and he got pretty famous for this finding. He did this study in which he filmed newlyweds having a like a fight. They were having a conversation about a can, he gave them a contentious topic and then have the, had them have sort of a conflict filled conversation about it for 15 minutes.

0:14:28 Thomas: Okay.

0:14:29 Lindsey: And he filmed that conversation and then coded the interactions for certain behaviors during the conflict and found that he could predict with like more than 80 accuracy which couples were going to be divorced Within Like three to six years, and so it was on the basis of four behaviors which, uh, you call the four horsemen of the relationship apocalypse. So, so criticism, defensiveness, stonewalling, and contempt were the things that he coded for.

0:14:42 Thomas: Oh, nice.

0:14:55 Thomas: Yeah, those all don't sound good.

0:14:58 Lindsey: Don't sound great. Nope, nope, nope. And so those are things specifically that come up. They're specifically things about the way that couples fight, right?

0:15:05 Thomas: Yeah, I remember this. Yeah.

0:15:06 Lindsey: Yeah. And there was a different study also where he found that he could predict with like 90% accuracy which couples who came in for marriage counseling would be divorced within 10 years, just from watching a five-minute interaction. So even less kind of data on there. So anyway, so let's see, Table linked a Slate article about Gottman. And the author made this claim, made a lot out of the fact that Gottman isn't making quote unquote "real predictions."

0:15:37 Thomas: Huh.

0:15:37 Lindsey: So the author of the Slate Article was like, when I hear prediction, I think that he's like sitting there making a prediction about whether the couple is going to get divorced and then like waiting for three to six years to see whether he was right. And I understand why the author of this article thinks that, but when I hear prediction, I assume that that means that Gottman did a regression analysis. And that is what it means, um,

0:15:54 Thomas: Yeah, yeah. Like you take the data already and then you find a way, like, oh, this thing explains, you know, would have, if you had that around when they started, you could have predicted what happened, but it's not like you wait around forever. 10 years, you're going to wait for 10 years. And then what if your prediction doesn't work? You're like, okay, I better slightly dial that in, try another 10 years.

0:15:56 Lindsey: Yeah. Exactly. Yeah.

0:16:17 Thomas: That's not really how it's done, is it?

0:16:16 Lindsey: In the... not really. I mean, there's longitudinal studies, but like, yeah, with stuff like this, it's like, yeah, my assumption is that if we say that we predicted something, it's because he's doing regression, yeah. Um, so at first reading this Slate article, I wasn't sure if there was a there there in terms of what this author was claiming about Gottman. But after doing some poking around, like it, I think there's there here. So I do think we should plan to do an episode on this.

0:16:43 Thomas: Wait, here or there? Where is there there?

0:16:45 Lindsey: Well, I did. It's impossible to tell where the there is. But I do actually think we should play to do another episode on those. I mean, the the close relationship stuff is really fascinating. His coding stuff is interesting in and of itself. And yeah, I had no idea that there there was any sort of deep concern about Gottman's results, but there is some of that coming from, from people within this area. Um, and that's super interesting to me.

0:17:09 Thomas: Yeah.

0:17:09 Lindsey: So like, yeah, thanks for the hot tip table. Um, let's, let's plan it.

0:17:11 Thomas: All right. So Bryan Gillis asks, SIO is the only Thomas podcast without intro intro quotes, unless he has a sixth hidden away somewhere I don't know about. If you were to add some, what type would you go for? Oh, that's, I don'T know. What do you think?

0:17:27 Lindsey: Uh, a hundred percent Jordan B. Peterson, I think. Yeah.

0:17:31 Thomas: That's a good answer. Yeah. Maybe just, I mean, that would, that actually would work for Daryl Dads as well. I kind of wanted to incorporate some of those, just the terrible, like men ones, the manosphere type ones, but it would also be fun for this. Yeah, or if we could find some people making making really dumb pseudoscience claims, you know, do that.

0:17:32 Lindsey: Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. That'd be good.

0:17:53 Thomas: That would be fun. But then you, maybe

0:17:54 Lindsey: Or maybe some, some quotes about spiders. That might be good spider quotes.

0:17:59 Thomas: The sound of two spiders getting it on. All right, GCU Problem Child asks, here we go. Strap in for two paragraph question, as always. Back when I was in sixth form college, for Americans, I'd say that's a combination of the later parts of high school and community college. Okay. I was taking a media studies course, and this one day, the lecturer asked us to go away and do online research about the 9-1-1?

0:18:05 Lindsey: Uh, I think 9-11.

0:18:31 Thomas: Okay, about 9-11, we'll say, so that we could have a group discussion about if 9-9-1 should be declared a national holiday in the U.S., like the task was intended to test our online research skills. Okay, to see if everybody devolves into conspiracy theory, I imagine, something like that. We'll See, when the group discussion came to, came, what, when the group discussion game, sorry, one of the teams decided to argue 9-1, 9-11 shouldn't be a national holiday because they found a website that said it was an inside job by the Bush administration. I said that's bullshit and that radical claims require radical evidence, but the lecture insisted that that was just my opinion and I need to let her speak, so I asked to go to the bathroom and stayed there till the class was over. How should a good lecturer, i.e. one who doesn't want his students to spread conspiracy theories in class, have handled that situation? Okay, what was the class for? Media studies. Hmm. At

0:18:32 Lindsey: I don't know if the was supposed to be there.

0:18:48 Lindsey: Yeah, I really like this question. And it's actually a very, very tough situation to handle as an instructor. Because on the one hand, you do want to fully engage when students bring up those kinds of opinions. They usually provide really good opportunities to demonstrate just how unsupported the position is. So I find that those moments can actually be very constructive and useful. At the same time, professors have a power dynamic with all of the students in their class. And so I think it's right to be careful and sensitive about how you respond in those moments, because I don't want to, I certainly don't Want to alienate any of my students and make them feel like they have, they don't have access anymore to a functional learning environment, just because they they hold this view that I, you know, from their perspective that I just disagree with or or whatever.

0:20:13 Lindsey: And so there is a real danger that if you don't handle that moment well, that that will happen, that you'll alienate somebody because they have a wrongheaded opinion. And that's not good. So, like, this, this happened all the time when we would talk about issues like racial bias in social psychology, like invariably students would bring perspectives to that discussion that were very cringe. And you had to be able to give them the space to say the things that they wanted to say, and then be able to guide a discussion that constructively responded to it. And that is, a it's a hard thing to do, like, in real time, in front of a room full of people. Um,

0:20:51 Thomas: The very least, though, the, this person should, first, I don't, this is, I don't understand what the lesson is here, like, is the lesson the debating, was the media studies professor trying to, like, get them to, like, work on debating? We should have a group discussion about why is that the topic? I don't even understand, for a media studies class. But if the point of it was more the, like, research part, then I think this is very apropos. Like, it's, you know, it'd be one thing if there was some other purpose to the discussion thing and you're just like, all right, for the sake of the argument, we'll just allow them to have this position, who cares?

But it sounds like, you know, explicitly it was about research, research, so I think at the very least the teacher should have said, yeah, no, that's right, that, uh, extreme, you know, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, that's just true, I mean, you could have just said, without even commenting on, you know, the, the 9-11 conspiracy stuff, at first, just be like, well, yeah, that's true, because, you know, if I say I'm, uh, you know, speaking to God or something, and God tells me I need to kill all of you, or you make it not religious or something, if I say I'm speaking to aliens at night, you need more evidence than me just being like, yeah, no, I'm speaking to the aliens and I need more. Like, and I think at least taking that part of it on could have been useful in the moment there.

0:21:17 Lindsey: Yeah.

0:21:43 Lindsey: I, No.

0:22:13 Lindsey: No, I totally agree with you, I don't think that responding with "that's just your opinion, man" is really a very helpful response, generally, but definitely not in the context of this kind of discussion. Um, so, yeah, I, I was not, like, I wasn't trying to say that I agreed read with the instructor's response. I just, I identify with how hard it is to handle it. So generally, if I'm leading a discussion and something like this comes up, generally what I will do is like, let the student make their point. And then I actually do want to provide a lot of space for contradicting sort of views on that. So I would want GCU to talk about their position and what evidence they have for it, and so the entire discussion would be trying to to come back to the issue of evidence and how you, how you evaluate evidence for particular claims and stuff. So that's how I would handle it, but yeah.

0:22:19 Thomas: Yeah, yeah.

0:22:31 Thomas: No, I know. I didn't take you to say that. Yeah.

0:23:08 Thomas: All right. Lost remote control says, what are your cancelable food takes?

0:23:12 Lindsey: Anchovies.

0:23:13 Thomas: Pineapple on pizza kind of realm. Here's my cancelable foot take. Shut the fuck up about pineapple on pizza. Pizza, it's fine, it's not even, it's not even a question, it's so weird, it's, I don't understand why, it's nice, it's not funny, it's completely fine and normal and it's fun. Shut up, everybody, that's my, there, you want cancelable food take, it's whatever, it's a weird, like, pizza, some sacred food that never has had anything different on it. There's a lots of weird shit goes on pizza, like, isolating, yeah.

0:23:46 Lindsey: Uh.

0:23:46 Thomas: Isolating pineapple is It's just the weirdest thing. Like, the Hawaiian pizza is a delightful pizza. I don't eat it anymore because I don't eat meat. And not having the meat on that kind of messes up the flavors, I think. But, like, yeah, there's some weird bullshit on pizza. There would be, like. Chicken fucking Parmesan pizza. You know, there' s, like., weird ones that, for me, are just disgusting. But, also, who gives a shit? Whatever anyone wants to put on a pizza is fine.

0:24:13 Lindsey: I generally share that opinion with most food stuff, I don't think that I have, like, anger reactions to other people's food preferences, so it, was this feels like a hard question to answer, um. Do you have any cancelable food take things? I don't know, oh.

0:24:23 Thomas: Yeah. Just what I said. My other one. I don''t know. Know I probably, my other cancelable food take would be, uh, which I proudly stand by, is that fast food is delicious actually, and Taco Bell is incredible cuisine, and, uh, everybody, uh, needs to stop pretending that fast food isn't delicious, um, because they're just fucking pretending. Yes.

0:24:30 Lindsey: Is that cancelable? Okay, yes.

0:24:50 Lindsey: I agree, I, maybe I misunderstood the question, so is the question like, what are our food takes that we would get canceled for? Oh. Okay I was thinking that the the person was asking about, like, what do we get angry about when we see other people do it with food, which is impossible, um.

0:25:11 Lindsey: I really like tendons, is that cancellable? I

0:25:10 Thomas: I don't think so, yeah. I think. Oh. God, you're off the show. The fuck you talking about? What?

0:25:18 Lindsey: Tendons is like one of my favorite foods actually, it's really good. No.

0:25:22 Thomas: How that's not a food. Do you go order like chicken tendons? Give me a box of tendons.

0:25:29 Lindsey: Like in you know, pho, like, the Vietnamese yeah so a lot of times at places you can, you can order it with stuff like tendon and tripe in it, and it's the, it's the best, the tendon is amazing because they slow cook it for like just years, it's, there's been boiling on a stovetop for years, and so it, the texture of it, like, it's really really soft, it's very good, is that cancelable? I don't know, okay.

0:25:33 Thomas: Oh yeah. Yes. You're right. I want to amend my previous answer about whatever anyone wants to do and put on pizza is fine. Tendons is not fine.

0:26:04 Lindsey: I would eat tendons on a pizza

0:26:05 Thomas: Oh God. So that's probably why, you know, it's a good reason why I'm a vegetarian. I don't give a shit about how it would taste. That would be irrelevant to me. I don't understand. There's certain things like that and veal and foie gras where I'm like, it is irrelevant what the flavor of this is. I'm not eating that thing in that way.

0:26:05 Lindsey: For sure, yeah.

0:26:27 Thomas: And tendons for some reason. Now, I'll admit, I shouldn't be, like, if I were someone who would eat meat, I wouldn't be like, well, but the tendons aren't okay. Like as though, as though I'd be like, all right, animal, I'm going to take all your muscle, but you can keep your tendons.

0:26:26 Lindsey: That's fair, yeah, correct.

0:26:37 Lindsey: Yeah if anything, I think that, I think that eating offal is is probably like more ethical, right? Because you're eating all of the stuff instead of just eating the muscle meat and I love offal, yeah, like I actually, I don't know if offal includes tendons, but it's like, it's, it generally refers to like organ meat and stuff, that, like, typically, yeah.

0:26:45 Thomas: Yeah. Yeah. Like eating everything. No, I agree. I agree, I awful. What is that?

0:27:04 Thomas: Yeah, it's gross. Yeah, no, I, and actually I think you're totally right. And I think that is like more consistent and it's, it really is. I'm not even joking. Like it is a reason why I was like, oh, I should be a vegetarian because I don't like having, I don't if hypocritical is the right word, but I don´t like having hypocritic or inconsistent views of things. I don ´t like it. I like to not do that because I´m not, I ´don´t really engage in cognitive dissonance well. I ¨don´ do that. So when I would eat stuff and be like, boy, I really only like meat when it´s in the shape of a dinosaur or something. Like when it ´s not, you know, like when I can´t see that it was was meat.

0:27:26 Lindsey: Right. Right.

0:27:42 Thomas: That's when I like it the best. And I was like, yeah, maybe that's a sign that I just shouldn't be fucking doing this. Like, I just don't like when it is an animal and it looked like when they do the whole chicken, you know, and this, I can't do that. It's weird.

0:27:47 Lindsey: Yeah. It sounds like we have opposite sort of reactions to that, um. Yeah I

0:28:00 Thomas: Yeah. Whereas you're like, give me his heart. I want to eat his heart, you got a bib on.

0:28:03 Lindsey: Have made pastrami out of heart before, that was pretty interesting, yeah.

0:28:07 Thomas: Oh my God. I, all right. I'm looking, by the way, looking to hire a new science person on the show. Um, who doesn't engage in, yeah, no, I, you're definitely cancel off this show. That's whatever I have power to cancel you on. Uh, but at least it's intellectually consistent. Okay. Ben Lillard, maybe ask this in an episode thread, but still curious whether this was a Lindsay was wrong or if I'm a bad listener. Yeah, this is a good place to ask stuff. We'll actually, you know, make sure to see it in the Q and a thread. So I'm glad you, uh, also asked it here in the turnaway studies. Studies part two, the conclusion was that most late-term abortions are actually not for health reasons. But since the Turnaway studies don't include abortions that were performed to protect the health of the mother, was that a fair conclusion? Or if late-terms abortions protect the health for the mother are included, would the majority still not be for health reasons? Yep. Worth going over that again, I think.

0:28:13 Lindsey: Oh. Oh wow. I did it, I got canceled, yeah. Yeah.

0:29:09 Lindsey: For sure, um, yeah, you're not a bad listener, Ben. And you're not a bad person either. But I really, I hope that that you just misheard this. I am happy to have the opportunity to address the question, though, because if you took that from the episode, then I'm sure other people did too. But we, we did talk at length about the difficulty of estimating the prevalence of health concerns as a reason for later abortions toward the beginning of that episode. And yeah, the Turnaway Study itself absolutely cannot be used to make any claims about the prevalence of second trimester abortions that are motivated by risk to the life of the pregnant individual versus those that are not, like, at all, because they, as you point out, they exclude those people from the study. However, the authors of the paper that we were talking about do reference other evidence beyond the Turnaway Study, and that evidence isn't super conclusive, but it does cast doubt on whether second trimester abortions are primarily pursued because of risk to the life or health of the pregnant person. And so we did spend some time talking about that.

0:30:11 Thomas: But that's second trimester.

0:30:13 Lindsey: That second trimester, and so I'm using that term for a reason, because another thing that I'm happy to have the opportunity to emphasize is that it appears that when we get into the territory of third trimester abortions, those, I believe, there's better evidence that those are likely to largely result from risk posed to the life or health of the pregnant individual, or because of fetal anomaly. But in the second trimestre, there are reasons to suspect that this may not be the case. But we just don't have access to the data to know, yeah.

0:30:13 Thomas: So, yeah. Yeah.

0:30:37 Thomas: Yeah, I think I think that was a problem with the episode that, that in retrospect, I wish we would have clarified, or I would have named it differently, because everyone in the world, because of the shitty discourse on this and because of, I think, conservatives, try pro-lifers trying to, like, so confusion, when you say like late term abortion or later term abortion, everyone thinks like 39.9 weeks, you know, and in that case you're like, yeah, it would be insane to think the majority of that would be anything other than extreme health concerns, but you were very specifically saying just in the later half, right, like just past the halfway point.

0:31:20 Lindsey: It was it was, uh, I think it was 21 weeks and later, yeah.

0:31:20 Thomas: Yeah well that would be half since it's 40 weeks, right, so yeah, uh, so that, I think, I didn't quite grasp the that or the implications of that, uh, or like how that would be perceived at the time, maybe, and so I think, I think emphasizing that would have been important, um, just to just to for clarity and and actually maybe dividing it rather than saying late, you, you know, kind of dividing it up more specifically like you just did now. So, good to emphasize that. Hopefully that didn't leave anyone else, you know. With the wrong impression. So thanks for the question.

0:31:25 Lindsey: Yeah yeah.

0:32:01 Lindsey: About How

0:32:03 Thomas: Back to, I don't mind if you want to call me a table, but why are you always sitting on me? What is the best bed for getting a good night's sleep? What? What's best for your back, scientifically speaking? Wow. Okay. There's some other caveats there. Yeah.

0:32:16 Lindsey: I'm not a bad doctor, yeah, um.

0:32:17 Thomas: Are you a doctor, bed doctor?

0:32:21 Lindsey: Yeah so I'm not, I'm gonna absolutely refrain from answering this as a scientist, it's just like this is not something I can competently answer, but I did have to buy a mattress recently, and I can tell you how I did that. And maybe this will be helpful. Because I feel like the outcomes that you care about here are all entirely accessible through subjective experience. Like does your back hurt when you wake up? Do you sleep through the night? Or is your bed so uncomfortable that you wake up, or whatever? So in theory, user reviews should give you usable information about how good a mattress will be for you. But the thing that makes selecting a good mattress tough is because, like, everything's an ad, um.

0:32:26 Thomas: Yeah yeah but yeah exactly, uh.

0:32:59 Lindsey: So I had to make several sort of larger purchases recently, including a mattress, and I subscribed to Consumer Reports while I was doing this, and, um, it was actually super helpful, um, so I mean, for anybody without familiarity, Consumer Reports is a non-profit that does independent product testing, and my, my impression is that that they are legit, right? Is that your impression? Like, their shit is not an ad.

0:33:24 Thomas: I don't know, I haven't looked into it, yeah, I

0:33:26 Lindsey: So they, what, yeah,

0:33:26 Thomas: I would be glad if the, uh, the fucking corporations haven't gotten to them yet and it's, it is like a, you know, legitimate thing, yeah, that would be really cool.

0:33:37 Lindsey: I mean, their claim is that they are really engaging in consumer advocacy, that they pay for all the products that they test. They do not accept free stuff from places. So I get the impression that the stuff I'm reading on Consumer Reports is not and ad. I found their information super helpful about mattresses, and I was able to find one that had very high ratings and all the things that I cared about, but was a lot cheaper than brands with a lot more sort of name recognition. And there was a really impressive level of granularity in terms of mattress ratings. So I was able to look at satisfaction specifically on dimensions that I care about, and ratings by people who share my characteristics as a sleeper. So, like, some of the ratings were like, this bed is rated highly by side sleepers, for instance, and things like like that, um, so I know that's not quite what you're asking for and

0:33:44 Thomas: Nice huh This is rated really highly by science sciencepersons who like eating hearts and fucking tendons you're like this is rated very highly by, um, Smiegel So that's good for you I think

0:34:30 Lindsey: Yeah, and admiring spider palps tend Yeah. I do like raw fish actually, maybe I am Smeagol, I don't know, I could be Yeah, I'm very sinewy, so

0:34:42 Thomas: You are, yeah. That's a good tip. I, the only tip I would give on the bed thing is, fucking, they got me. Be beware of any - I won't name names - but companies are like, like, you get a try before you buy sleep guarantee, sleep a hundred nights on it, you don't like it, return it. Check that that applies to the whole purchase, 'cause I got fucking got, 'cause they're like, yeah, that applies to the mattress, but the, you know, the entire rest of the bed, that's like 95% of the cost of the bad. You're stuck with that.

0:34:47 Lindsey: Yeah. Oh, Wow, helpful.

0:35:17 Thomas: So that it was a good thing that I was like, all right, I guess I'll keep it. And actually the, it, it worked out the bed. I actually, it's fine. I actually like it now. But at first I was like, I'm not sure I like this. What's the return? I just emailed. I was, like, I don't know if I'm liking this. What's return policy? And they're, like. Oh, yeah. You can return, yeah, $5 of it for your massive purchase. And so that got me.

0:35:38 Lindsey: Yep.

0:35:38 Thomas: Look out for that. All right. GCU Problem Child asks, "So I suppose you opt to not tell your children how symmetrically, symmetrally, how - oh, sorry, I can't read - how systemically unjust the world is because you're worried knowing the government, police, school system, etc. doesn't actually always have their best interest at heart, and that might scare and upset them. What are the long-term effects of sheltering your kids in that way? A while back, I sent a question into Philosopher's Space about trying to prevent your kids from knowing how unjust the world really is to keep them from worrying might result in them turning to the right in adulthood because they - they won't have an understanding of stuff like privilege." Thomas pointed out that that's an empirical question. I think I agree, so rather than a philosopher, I'd like to hear a scientist's take on the long-term effects of sheltering kids from learning about injustice, uh, interesting, what do you think, yeah

0:35:42 Lindsey: Yeah.

0:36:37 Lindsey: I mean, I feel like you and I have a little, little firsthand knowledge about how being sheltered from this stuff can sort of mean that you take a while to understand certain progressive causes.

0:36:44 Thomas: Definitely Hmm.

0:36:50 Lindsey: So, and yeah, and that the antidote for that is in fact being educated about these things. So, yeah, but posing it as an empirical question, as like something that I could look at literature about, I actually think is a super interesting - interesting question, because I am a hundred percent certain that there is research that would directly speak to this, but I actually had a hell of a time coming up with like, what are the relevant search terms going to be that I would want to bring in? So I think that this is actually probably another one that we should just do an episode on. I want some more time to figure out exactly what I'm looking for to like pull from, but, um, I would love to do an episode on this about how education about things sort of informs views over time.

0:37:10 Thomas: Yeah yeah hmm yeah Well, I mean, yeah, at its heart, though, it's - it's fairly simple, as you say. It's like, yeah, if you learn incorrect things, then you might be incorrect, like um and I think that might be true. I - I mean, there's - it's also, I think it's also true that there are ways you could instill values in your children that would lead them to compassionate politics without having, you know, made them watch Schindler's List every day or something, you know, like, I think - I think there's ways that you might go about balancing it. I, for one, definitely want to wait really as long as I can before, you know, kids. I think a lot of this is taken care of by the school curriculum, but not usually in the right way. And so we've talked a lot about - Lydia and I have talked a lot about wanting to sort of supplement whatever history education our kids are getting with actual history, um, somewhat, so that - that is something that I might opt to do.

0:37:33 Lindsey: Um, Yeah. Yeah.

0:38:41 Thomas: But it's also hard to know, it's hard, you know, and we also work, so it's like I would like to be able to trust the school system to just fucking educate my kids, that would be nice, with actual facts about what happened, but there you go. And another, I don't mind if you want to to call me a table. Wow, you're a real GCU Problem Child this month. "Could I just drop my not sleepy until 3 a.m. late chronotype body into a city six hours of time zones over, take melatonin tablets, the regulated Australian ones, at 2 or 3 p.m., and suddenly become a functioning member of normal society? Or would my cell's cycle adapt to the time zone I'm now living in, and I'd slowly become a night owl again? I'm wondering whether a parent who migrates across time zones might maintain their cycle from their homeland and then potentially pass that cycle timing to their offspring."

0:39:34 Thomas: Well, I'm not sure if that's how it works. I think we kind of addressed this at the time, because my joke plan was that I'm just going to keep moving - which direction was it, I guess west, I think, right? I think I got it, I'm Going Keep Moving West Until I'm Not a Morning Person, because your body, my body anyway, does just adjust. I've tried to do every trip I've ever taken, I try to do this, I am like, "Ah, go back, reset my clock, now I am exhausted, so I'll just go to sleep at a reasonable hour and then I'll be converted to a normal person," and it just doesn't work every single time.

0:40:05 Lindsey: It's a well-timed question, though, because I'm currently in the process of rapidly advancing my sleep schedule to prepare for going to England so that I'm not insane the entire time that I've been there. I'm just insane right now.

0:40:14 Thomas: And I'm just preparing to be insane the entire time while I'm there

0:40:17 Lindsey: Yeah, no, I'm insane right - right now, it's pretty cool. But yeah, so I don't mind readdressing this, though. So yeah, if you flew to a time zone that was six hours earlier than you, you would temporarily sort of be on a roughly normal sleep-wake schedule. No, you don't have to do melatonin or any of that crap. Like, your biological clock would just make you sleepy around the time that is normal for most folks in that time zone. But within a week or so, you would adapt and be on the same sleep schedule that you are now relative to the local time and the new place you're in. So you do adapt. So, like, there's not anything about your body's circadian timing that is independent of your environment. Your cells are constantly synchronizing with the zeitgebers in your environment in specific ways that make you sort of revert to a late schedule by default.

0:41:07 Lindsey: And so if you move to a new environment, your cells are going to quickly synchronize to the pattern of zeitgevers in that new environment and you'll end up on the same schedule unless you do something intentional to change it. Um, so yeah, but, but with the use of things like, uh, melatonin and stimulants, like, you can change your sleep cycle relative to zeitgebers. It's just that's not a schedule that you're going to revert to. Like, right now I am getting sleepy around 8 PM and I'm waking up before four. So that's possible. It's just not - it's not very pleasant, and I feel insane, but, uh, yeah, yeah, it's possible. Well,

0:41:33 Thomas: Jesus.

0:41:45 Thomas: Well, we'll see the results of the experiment, my plan is to just be weird for a weekend, like, I'm not, you know, it's not that long of a trip, if it was longer I'd be with you, but it's, yeah

0:41:56 Lindsey: I've never been to England before, so I kind of want to be able to get all I can out of it while I'm there, so I don't know, I really didn't want to be jet-lagged the whole trip, so yeah

0:42:05 Thomas: Well, I'm Curious to see how it works. Ice Cube or Ice T, I'm not sure, asks, "I am old enough to remember when the boogeyman of the day was giving kids participation trophies and how that was bad for their development. I am fairly confident that it is good for young kids' self-esteem and mental development to not feel bad about losing, but I am curious if there is any research to back this up."

0:42:06 Lindsey: Um.

0:42:26 Lindsey: Yeah, so this is a big question. I don't mean to keep doing this, but like we probably should just put this in the show topics list, like Um, Yeah, because I, I do, you think that there's some sort of like moral panic flavor to the idea that participation trophies is like – the claim is that it like ruined the millennial generation, right?

0:42:34 Thomas: All right, sure.

0:42:47 Lindsey: Wasn't that us?

0:42:46 Thomas: Oh, yeah, it is so fucking dumb. Yeah.

0:42:48 Lindsey: Yeah, it's dumb. But one thing that I spend a significant amount of time on in social psych is talking about the self-esteem movement and the fact that I do think it was sort of a misguided kind of movement, because the way that it's implemented is like, I don't know, it's not necessarily a good thing to try to raise self-esteem per se, right? It has to be attached to something that's actually meaningful.

0:43:14 Thomas: Interesting.

0:43:14 Lindsey: So I think that what they were trying to do, right, which is actually genuinely improve sense of self-worth, is a lot more complicated than like shielding kids from this experience of like feeling bad about losing or something. I don't actually think that losing is like like a negative experience necessarily, you know?

0:43:27 Thomas: Yeah. Yeah. Well, all that legitimate stuff aside, because that is interesting. I'd be curious about that. Participation trophies are just so fucking irrelevant that regardless of any of the answers of that participation trophies have no impact on anything. They're nothing. Nobody gives a shit about it. It wasn't. It's like, oh, we, you know, the fact that parents handed out a little button once to the kids when they're a certain age or whatever, you knows, just so minor and minuscule. It doesn't, there's no fucking way that mattered. You know, I guess you could argue like a whole attitude of rewarding kids for stuff they didn't actually accomplish, maybe, but like distilling it down to participation trophies to me is just so silly, like it's just such a nothing uh

0:43:45 Lindsey: Yeah. Right. Yeah. Yeah, I think that's fair.

0:44:17 Lindsey: Yeah. But yeah, no, I do think this would be an interesting, an interesting thing to spend some time on and a focused thing.

0:44:24 Thomas: Well we've got a time, why don't we, uh, bonus round it, one question from September, because we got a little bit of time, uh, here. So what do you think, what's your your favorite one we didn't get to? Sure

0:44:35 Lindsey: What about the artificial womb one? That would be fun.

0:44:38 Thomas: I don't have it up, to you can, you mind reading it? Who

0:44:40 Lindsey: Oh, sure. Yeah? I would love to hear both Thomas's and Lindsay's reflections on what I call the the artificial womb thought experiment. One, imagine a world where we had a perfect artificial womb that could healthily carry an otherwise unwanted pregnancy to term. And two, we also have a Star Trek-like device allowing us to painlessly and safely move a fertilized embryo into our artificial womb without any negative effects on the pregnant person or the embryo, zygote, fetus. I'd think this would get progressives to a place where we could find a place to agree, agree with conservatives, but when I raise this argument, the conservative usually has a retort like, quote, "I wouldn't favor that artificial womb because it lets people that can become pregnant abdicate their responsibility for having sex in the first place." So that's fun, do you have thoughts on this? Oh,

0:45:32 Thomas: Asked the question first off. Nice.

0:45:33 Lindsey: Sorry. Yeah, uh, give to modestneeds.org, then visit deep deepfakestop.com. Yeah.

0:45:39 Thomas: Um, I, yeah, I mean, I think really what this distills down to is, even Roe v. Wade, for example, uh, was a balancing test of the state's interest in the fetus versus the parents, or the, you know, the the mother's interest, or pregnant person's interest and bodily autonomy. And I'm left wondering, I would like to get your thoughts on, like, if you forget, essentially, this is like, forget bodily autonomy, like, we create a hypothetical such that bodily autonomy is not even an issue. Is there some, like, at what point would you think that the state or doctors or whoever would have the obligation to save an unwanted pregnancy?

0:46:27 Thomas: Cause like, like clearly if someone gave birth to a baby and then that second, again, this is all hypotheticals cause this isn't real. But like that second was like, I can't, I don't want this baby. You'd be like, well, okay, we can't just fucking throw it away. Like at that point, we feel that we have a moral obligation to not kill that baby. And I think the Peter Singer point is kind of hard to deal with philosophically, which is like, well, that's not there's nothing magical that happens five minutes before that, that would make it a whole. But then it would be OK to just like kill the baby because it is five minutes away from being born. So, like, I think there must be some sort of timeline there where even a pro-choice atheist like me would think like, oh, yeah, I guess at that point. But I don't know. I'm not actually sure. What do you think?

0:46:55 Lindsey: I don't know where that line is. I mean, I think there's, yeah, I don't know. But I don't think that it's de facto moral to preserve life just because you can. So, I d n't know, like, this is genuinely difficult. I really don t know. And I think it's, you know, drawing, it makes sense that we end up drawing the line at birth, because we're evolved creatures. And, you know, the fact that our mechanisms kind of kick in more and more strongly as the the gestational age sort of advances makes perfect sense. Um, I really, I, I don't know, it's it's tough for me to analyze this in a way that would actually provide any kind of coherent answer as to where the line is, though. Um, and it makes sense to me that it would be difficult to do that. Yeah.

0:47:36 Thomas: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

0:48:11 Thomas: So you're tapping out.

0:48:12 Lindsey: Pretty much. Uh, but like there are there

0:48:13 Thomas: So you really wanted to not answer this question.

0:48:17 Lindsey: Was, I guess, the only other things I'd say is that, like, you know, so if you put autonomy aside, like, there are a lot of other issues that need to be addressed in this question. Right. Like, so, if we're going to raise every unwanted pregnancy in the artificial womb and bring those to term, it's like there's a whole bunch of other problems that we have to fix in order for that to be a moral or ethical system. Right? Right. Like, who's going to raise it?

0:48:44 Thomas: Yeah, exactly.

0:48:45 Lindsey: Do we have artificial loving parents, too? Right. So I don't know. I think I don' know.

0:48:50 Thomas: I think, yeah, I was going to say that, too. I think it really depends on the state of the world. If you lived in some world where, like, there was a ton of people wanting to adopt and no availability, you know, that might change my mind. Especially, again, if we're completely eliminating the bodily autonomy thingy to be like, well, you Know, a lot of people really want to raise a child and can't for some reason.

0:49:10 Lindsey: Yeah. Mm hmm.

0:49:16 Thomas: And so I think you could set some certain point at the pregnancy and any line you draw is going to be arbitrary. Like that's just how humans work. But you could you know, we could like try our best. Maybe it would be something to do with viability, but not, you know or something. I don't know something to deal with like how development how developed the thing is. I also, I think the tough philosophical bullet to bite that that Peter Singer argument brings out, I think it is actually pretty tough to answer consistently. And I also agree with you that it's like, well, you know, emotions and chemicals are involved in human decisions and like seeing a baby crying is just like too much. And actually, I actually am partial to answers like that, Where it's like, OK, I think if you were just a robot doing math, you might be like, yeah, an anti-human unit needs to like have a certain amount of experiences for it to matter if it dies or it needs, you know, or it means to matter because like the parents want it or whatever.

0:49:24 Lindsey: Yeah. Mm hmm?

0:50:18 Thomas: Whatever. But like, if you're taking that aside, it's an unwanted pregnancy kind of thing, unwanted child. I think it might be strictly mathematically, philosophically true that like the correct answer in that case would be like, oh no, it is no different until the baby reaches a certain amount of sentience. It is actually no different than if we had aborted it late, late term kind of things. And it is just that we think it is different. But I am partial to answers that are like, yeah, but that matters.

I think there's also a cost, an emotional toll to living in a world where it's like, oh yeah, someone who's going to work as the baby killer that needs to kill these unwanted babies that are born. And that knowledge that people would have that that exists would just be really heartbreaking, I think, for a lot of people. I think that is very important to the calculation. And so I agree with you that it's like, yeah, I mean, I think I'm willing to accept that that's not perfectly philosophically consistent to say that there's some bright line when it's born or whatever. But I don't, you know, I don't that might just be what we have to do.

0:50:57 Lindsey: Yeah.

0:51:25 Thomas: So, I dunno.

0:51:24 Lindsey: Yeah, no, I agree with that. Yeah.

0:51:28 Thomas: Yep. All right. Well, we answered a bonus question. I hope you enjoyed this Q&A. We'll put up the November Q&E thread and hopefully there's more good questions for November in, you Know, as always go to patreon.com/seriouspod to support the science thingies and continue Lindsay's ability to, uh, look into like, I don't know, three or four things that are episodes, um, from these Q and A's that'll be good. And that's where you can ask future.

0:51:54 Lindsey: And keep me well stocked in tendons, mostly. Yeah. Kind of.

0:51:58 Thomas: Yeah. I don't know if Patreon uses tendons as a payment method. If it does, I got, yeah, sure, be at the five tendon level. Lindsey will grade your paper. Give her enough tendons. She'll do anything. All right. Thanks everybody. See you next time.

0:52:08 Lindsey: Mm-hmm. Yeah.

0:52:26 Clip: Thank you so much for listening to Serious Inquiries Only. If you like the show, the absolute best thing you can do is support us at patreon.com/seriouspod. The second best thing you can do, is please share it on social media or by word of mouth. Speaking of social media, follow me on Twitter at Serious Pod. If would like to be Facebook friends, send me a request at facebook.com Thomas podcast. If not up for that level of intimacy, that's fine. Maybe you want to join the discussion at facebook.com/groups/SIO members. Thank you again for listening. We'll see you next time.