e with a four-year-old or something like that um typically um so that all right pretty pretty universal in fact the other thing is we have to remember that we we didn't evolve in a nature that we related to as if it was an impersonal order we evolved in a nature that was actually filled with other minds predators and prey and potentially other human beings right so nature has the capacity i mean and some people have even extended this within cognitive science to be to an overly reductive account of religion religion is just where we have a hyper active agency detector machine and wherever there's ambiguous information we project an agent there and that's how we get god um well i think that plausibly at work as a factor trying to reduce religion to that i think is is really over overly reductive nevertheless the idea that nature if we i think have been socialized to a significant enough degree can powerfully like expose us to perspectives and here's where what i want to add to it with other minds and other perspectives that are not human i think that's one of the ways that in which debbie are you there i paused the recording and so it was only a couple seconds there um oh just no no technology is the god that limps um so um i was making the argument that uh nature precisely because it puts us in you know a plethora of minds many of them non-human actually has a tremendous capacity uh to decenter us and also to put us in the flow state and do all kinds of things um and that we can internalize that in a way and um that strikes me again as very plausible um it's you probably are going to need again some basic training in a meta-perspectival ability and you're going to need some way of grocking your natural environment such that it's internalizable to you rather not as just sort of chaotic you know other minds but as some sort of like an ecology basically there's got to be something that ecologizes the world for you so it's internalizable and so i i think i could make a good case for that being incorporated in what i'