The first one was around levels of certainty in the various sciences, so I wanted to do something comparing the level of certainty that’s applied in engineering or in particle physics for instance, 6 Sigma, with the level of certainty in psychology and other sciences along those lines. Where not only is the the level of certainty given by an individual study lower, but people are not transmutable units in the same way that the fundamental particles are fundamentally different things. So studies in one place don’t necessarily tell us anything that’s all about human nature. Even if they’re replicated across a few cultures, it does really tell us anything at all, especially those conducted contemporaneously without analogs or similar evidence from ancient theories or from anthropological research, I’d argue Psychology can only tell us how people are in modern society, not what people are in a meaningful 3%. So when we’re thinking about being human, it really isn’t much of an evidence base on which to to base your arguments. You’re almost better looking to recurring themes and motifs and analogies drawn through literature. over the ages, and particularly things which recur things which appear in very different cultural cons, in very different cultural zones of the world and different historical time periods where the momentary concerns which people were facing were different. Because if if you’re finding that certain characteristics of what it means to be human recur in different context that suggests there’s something deeper to it rather than it just being a momentary instance of what people are like at that moment in time. I find that quite interesting. The second thing I wanted to think quickly about was emotional processing and how that works in response to Johnny’s tweet. And it’s a really interesting area because it obviously involves a whole somatic experience. And I don’t really know where I wanted to go with that, but I wanted to talk and think about that at some point.

I’d like to work out a taxonomy for certainty as far as my thoughts are concerned that’s focused on the feeling of certainty rather than trying to do this the super forecasting way. So something like uncertain perhaps tentative probable almost certain and certain. Almost certain is the wrong one. There must be something between probable and certain in the way that I think believe probable, believe certain. Maybe those. Because I think, really, the way that I think about probability is based on those feelings. It’s based on what my subconscious tells me about my confidence level as regards to various things. And I’ve transmuted presented used before, and I don’t find that especially convincing. So I’d rather do this the more honest way of keeping it feelings based even though I I suspect suspect readers would assume that those words are meaningless. I could leave a translation somewhere on our website. I guess, the percentages because the calibration’s pretty good in my head anyway. Yeah.