if you say instead to me i think that reality is ultimately a temporal it's like what okay what does that mean and like that would change how i think about so many things that approach so many problems i'm going to need a lot right you know you know and sagan sort of invoked that people get it wrong but he was trying to invoke extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence he's trying to say there's a balancing process there is that okay yeah what do you what what what are you saying about sagan and in terms of his claim you so so people invoke a claim and it's it's not a claim that comes from formal logic or mathematics but carl sagan made a claim that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence which means if i'm going to if i'm going to pause it something that has a tremendous elegance in that it's extraordinary it's going to cause me to reformulate how i solve so many problems or think about so many domains i'm going to need and he doesn't just need quantity i'm going to need a lot of convergent evidence to make that construct that i'm using trustworthy that's you are you saying that logically epistemically socially what's how are you making that claim so how i'm making that claim is i'm making that claim epistemically it's the claim that uh and it's basically a cognitive claim because uh think about elegance as risk-taking so what you're doing in elegance is you're committing your limited attentional and other cognitive resources right to doing to framing the world to do this is how i'm going to do relevance realization you're committing to it you're caring about the world in a particular way and so what that means is you're taking a great you there's a risk there's always a risk when you're doing that and to to the more you commit forward the more you want to have seen and milgram puts it this way the more your forward commitments are the more your backward commitments have to be and so the more i'm risking forward right the more i want to have a trustworthy thing to mitigate that risk yeah o