4. Cody Kommers: Podcasting as a PhD student, intuitive anthropology, and finding a good problem

Cody Kommers is a PhD student in experimental psychology at the University of Oxford, focussing on social cognition. He also writes popular science and hosts two podcasts: Cognitive Revolution and Notes From The Field.

In this conversation, we talk about a variety of topics, including how to start a podcast, how to run a podcast while doing a PhD, Cody's new travel-podcast, his preprint on intuitive anthropology, and the problem of finding a good problem.

BJKS Podcast is a podcast about neuroscience, psychology, and anything vaguely related, hosted by Benjamin James Kuper-Smith. New long-form conversations every other Friday. You can find the podcast on all major podcasting platforms (e.g., Apple/Google Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, etc.) and on YouTube.

Timestamps
0:00:05: Inviting guests onto a podcast
0:09:45-0:16:30: An interlude on Steven Pinker
0:30:57: Building a podcast
0:41:00: Conversation or interview?
0:47:00: How to conduct a good interview
1:05:00: Combining PhD work with podcasting
1:17:34: A brief interlude on Cody's interview with Mark Granovetter
1:23:15: Jobs after PhD
1:30:54: Cody's new podcast 'Notes from the Field'
1:37:37: Cody's not-so-secret obsession with anthropology
1:44:19: Cody's preprint 'The intuitive anthropologist'
2:10:42: Finding a problem for your PhD, and finding a path as a scientist


Links
Podcast links

• Website: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/

• Twitter: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcast

Cody's links

• Website: www.codykommers.com/

• Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=ImTtx_kAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao

• Twitter: https://twitter.com/codykommers

• Preprint: https://psyarxiv.com/3sc96/

Ben's links

• Website: www.bjks.page/

• Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=-nWNfvcAAAAJ

References
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. Basic books.
Kommers, C. (2020). The Intuitive Anthropologist: Why “Intuitive Psychology” Falls Short for Making Sense of Those Who Are Different. PsyArXiv.

• Read Full Transcript

  [This is an automated transcript that contains many errors]

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: [00:00:00] Actually, this is a question I have to you. I mean, I've been really surprised by how willing people are to come and be a guest on a podcast. There is maybe the slight caveat that I've mainly asked people I know so far, but even so far, the people I have, I've asked you, I dunno, have pretty much all said yes within, you know, I write an email a day later that say, sure, this sounds great.
  
  

  Is this something that you've also experienced, or, I mean, because it seems to me also you are asking more, you are asking like the almost household names within academia, whilst I'm asking like, the people whose work I know, whose papers I've read in, like irrespective of how famous they are in that sense.
  
  

  So I'm, I've always been curious like whether you have to like write 20 emails to get one Yes. Or how that works out. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. You know, uh, I've actually also been surprised by the, by the high hit rate. Um, I'd say my, my sort of yes ratio is about 50%. Um, so obviously a lot of [00:01:00] these people that I'm, uh, trying to get on are, are pretty busy and they get lots of offers to do stuff.
  
  

  Um, so definitely, uh, a lot of 'em have, you know, valid reasons for not doing it. But yeah, mine mine's around 50%. Uh, I'd I'd say, and definitely I think part of it is the nature of podcasting. So, um, you know, people like to have conversations and it's not very much effort for them to come on here and do it.
  
  

  You know, there's not a lot of prep and I think that that is something appealing about that. So it's a, it's a relatively high and enjoyable payoff for something that doesn't have a lot of effort involved. Uh, and then the other thing is that, um, I think that there is, um, a combination of something about the nature of my show where it's a little bit more personal, and that's not always a question or a, a sort of program of questions.
  
  

  Academics are always gonna get asked. And also I just have my, uh, what is it? My, um, my cold email [00:02:00] dialed in. I, I have a, a really great cold email, uh, that I hit people with. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Okay. Uh, well I, so ask two questions related to that. The, um, first one is, so you said you ask more personal questions. Is that something that you think makes people more or less likely wanting to come onto the show?
  
  

  Cody Kommers: It's a mixed bag. Um, because I think it's, uh, you know, academics are always gonna get asked about, oh, so you are famous for answering this question. Tell me about your answer to this question. Right? That's the thing that someone's always going to ask them. But then if you come at them and say, well, you know, I see you're famous for answering this question.
  
  

  How did you get interested in that question in the first place? That's something that very few people are gonna ask them. And so to me, I think a lot of people are. Drawn to being able to talk about that and, you know, uh, just being able to talk about themselves. 'cause to some people, 'cause to some extent, most people like to do that a lot.
  
  

  And, um, but then also I think that the, uh, there I, I've gotten a few responses [00:03:00] explicitly because they don't wanna talk about themselves, but that's much rare. That's much rare. Uh, and it was also like someone 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: said, like, yeah, I would love to talk about my, my personal life, or, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: yeah. I mean, I, I literally had, uh, one person who was like, uh, I won't disclose their name, but they were very famous psychologists who I look up to a lot, and they were, they were like, well, you know, the podcast sounds great and I wish you the best luck, but I won't do it because I don't believe it's, it's worthwhile to talk about myself, uh, uh, versus, uh, because I think the work should be front and center.
  
  

  And to be honest, I was super impressed by all. I I thought that was super badass. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. Uh, so 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: yeah, I mean, I guess to some extent, uh, maybe that is a slight overlap then between the, what I'm trying to do and what you are doing. Like, I, I'm not that interested in the personal things per se, but I am interested in kind of the stuff that didn't make it into the paper often.
  
  

  Yeah. Um, so like that, for example, that question is something I'm also really interested in. And that was, for example, really interesting when I talked to Aaron about this because it was like a, it. You had this whole [00:04:00] discussion in the field and his just come, came completely out of nowhere. It seemed to me like a completely new approach to the whole thing.
  
  

  So I asked him like, what, like how did that come about? And he said like, well, I was just trying to like, feel like basically reverse engineer it and think like, how could I make this? And then I simulated and then suddenly there it was. And that, um, yeah. So I, I am also really interested in this kind of like, how did people 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: get that?
  
  

  I think that's a really interesting point about, um, academic papers, which in one sense they're an extremely efficient means of communicating information, which is that you know exactly what's going to be said in what order. And so you can, you can really get a complicated thing into your mind from, uh, uh, in, in a relatively short period of time.
  
  

  However, they're extremely inefficient in the, in another sense because they're so rigid. There's all this stuff, uh, that's just not, um, you know, sort of standard stuff to put in there that gets left out, which might in fact be really interesting. And [00:05:00] yeah, I agree. So there needs to be another format for exploring those things.
  
  

  Plus they're also boring as hell for the most part. Uh, and, uh, whereas podcasts as a forum tend to be way more engaging just based on the number of people that listen to podcasts versus read academic papers. Yes. And, uh, so I think that it, uh, you know, discussing these sort of, uh, things is a welcome addition to the official documents that represent the results.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, exactly. I, I, and I especially agree with what you said about addition here because I think, um, I mean, I actually read a lot of papers and I, despite you saying they all very boring. I kind of enjoy quite a lot. Um, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: well that's why you're getting your PhD it. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, exactly. But the, yeah, I think there's just so much that I mean, yeah, also, as I said, like it's an efficient format, so it wouldn't really make sense to put in all this other stuff if basically like, you know, a paper that [00:06:00] has a specific purpose and hopefully podcasts or other media can provide a different kind of purpose.
  
  

  Um, wait, now I forgot. Forgot the second point. Cold emails. Oh, your, your cold email. Exactly. Yeah. Uh, this is actually kind of interesting because I, I realized after you responded to, to my request, I realized I'd kind of forgotten almost to describe the podcast. It seemed to me, um, I have to admit. Even though we had like no contact prior that email somehow I just assumed you were gonna say yes, just because we're like both doing podcast, doing like, feel like 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: guy, he's a Yeah, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: no, no, just like, because of the shared, like we're doing a PhD in, it seems like, I dunno exactly what you're doing and maybe we'll get to that.
  
  

  Like, but vaguely social neuroscience or something like that. Um, both interested in writing a podcasting and somehow other like, yeah, he's definitely gonna say yes. And then I almost did explain what I'm trying to do. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Um, no, I totally, I was, I was a shoe in the whole time. So you were, [00:07:00] you were correct in that assumption.
  
  

  Um, but the thing that I've been surprised about, so you were, you were mentioning how you've talked to a lot of people that you know, and I reach out to people who are, you know, more public figures or whatever, at least so far. That's the, that's the trend for our different shows. But the thing that's I've been sort of shocked by and even taken aback is that the lowest hit percentage that I have.
  
  

  So the people who are most likely to say no are the people who I know personally, um, really, and, uh, they may not be my best friend of all time, but it's like I've worked with them or like I, you know, have, have a long standing history of expressing interest in their work and I send 'em a message and I'm like, Hey, I'm doing this podcast.
  
  

  Uh, you know, uh, we'll describe what the message says, uh, more generally in a second. Uh, and. I've been just, I've been shocked by how many of those people say no. Whereas all of the, the, the, like, the majority of people that I don't know, uh, say yes. And I think what it [00:08:00] is, is that, because in one case it's sort of like, you know, some, somewhere between a personal favor and taking on, you know, more responsibility from your students.
  
  

  Uh, so it's about you giving to a, uh, you know, another ent, uh, another person, you know, why they're either, you know, whatever your commitment level is, them just, just academics are so, they've got so much responsibility in terms of their charges, and it's just adding to that plate. Whereas when you reach out to someone you don't know, it's not about the personal connection, it's about you offering them a platform to, uh, you know, further their work.
  
  

  And that's something. And so I feel like there's a really big conceptual distinction there is what I've found, which I was really surprised by that both how many of the people that I don't know say yes, and how many people that I do know, uh, say no. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, that really just does surprise me because I mean, I, I've basically only contacted people I've asked so far.
  
  

  Uh, I, no, I've only, I've only asked people who no, so far and all of them have said yes. [00:09:00] And, um, but then again, even I've, I've now asked four people who I don't know, uh, two said yes. One, I mean, I only sent the email two days ago and two hasn't responded yet. And the other person said. Sounds really cool, but like Corona, I have children and stuff, and I'm like, right now I can't, but ask me again in half a year.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: That's a, that's a tough, uh, caveat right now at the sort of, uh, beginning of Corona. So I've actually been taking a break from the podcast for the past month, and it's been awesome. I've been taking a break from pretty much everything. Um, I was gonna 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: ask about that because there's, there's been no episode 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: since two.
  
  

  There's been no episode. Uh, I was wondering if anyone noticed, but, uh, but at, anyway, I have, um, wife that, that's very, that's, that's very kind and sensitive you to notice. But, um, let's see. So, uh, yeah, at the beginning I was like, Hmm, well, who's, who's gonna have the highest probability of having additional time to do things?
  
  

  And that's when I reached out to Stephen Pinker, um, who I was like, okay, well, Stephen Pinker spends most of his time doing talks and shit [00:10:00] anyway. Um, so, uh, now that all his talks are canceled, he doesn't have kids, uh, uh, you know, all of the stuff, uh, it's not like he's gonna have nothing to do, but, uh, all of his, the things that he was going to do, uh, probably would've fallen through.
  
  

  And so that's when I reached out to him and that one came through. However, I think the, the asterisk there is that if you look at. Just if you, if you follow Steven Pinker, if you just search him in Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts, he goes on everyone's podcast. So it's almost not, I don't even know that it's a, it's a badge of, of merit to get him on.
  
  

  People look at that and they're like, wow, that's like, that's a big name. It must have really some finagling to get that. And it's like, honestly, uh, I don't think so. I think, uh, he, he, like, he is just, he was willing to provide his perspective and opinion into any vacuum into which, uh, he has the opportunity to do so.
  
  

  Um, uh, which is glorious. And I think that that's one of the reasons why he is famous as he is, is because he takes every damn opportunity he [00:11:00] has to, um, present himself like that. Um, and uh, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: yeah. That's really interesting. I would've, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Somehow assumed almost the opposite. I know that he, yeah. Actually, I have one question.
  
  

  So have you read many of his books then, I'm assuming? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Oh, yeah. I've, I've, I've spent way too many hours reading his stuff. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: So I have one question. This is something that I've only experienced with Steven Pinker's books and that really confuses me. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: So I think I've now bought four of his books and I've never gotten beyond page around 150.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: And I, I finish every book I read pretty much, but somehow every single one of his books, I, I started, I'm really interested. And then after around a hundred pages, I lose interest. Okay. And I don't know. And I, and I can't identify why 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I think this 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: is, and it's only with his books. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I think this is really fair.
  
  

  So let's take, uh, a case, a case study. I don't know if you. If you read this one, but Better Angels of Our Nature. Um, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: uh, no, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I assume that's, that's what I want to try with, um, enlightenment. Now, if maybe you picked up that one, which is, that's, that's 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: one I [00:12:00] have a a hundred page, 180 at least. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: So I, I assume I haven't read Enlightenment now, um, but I assume it's, uh, making a very similar argument.
  
  

  You know, it's, it's, it's, it's a, it's a corollary argument to, uh, better angels. So, um, enlightenment now is about how, um, the world's getting better and, uh, better Angels is about how the world is not getting worse, um, right. And us all the bad things are, are going away. And so, uh, the reason why it's hard to get through 800 pages of, um, better Angels is that if you believe this statement, which can be summed up somewhere between a, a statement and a, a paragraph, which is that overall most of the things that we don't want to happen in society are happening less and less in the places which they happen most.
  
  

  If you, if you just mentally entertain some version of that proposition, then you have got the, uh, the most important parts of better Angels. 'cause every page of that, um, uh, book is just [00:13:00] in, so it's, it's just reiterating a different version of that thesis. And yeah, you could pick up some details. They may or may not be interesting, um, but a lot of it is just, um, saying.
  
  

  And this is where it gets to his books more generally. Here is a proposition which is going to engage quite a bit of controversy. That's, that's part of the key. And uh, I am going to hit you with every single piece of evidence that I can find, uh, in favor of that, uh, thing. So you're not actually the, like, in terms of like entropy, in terms of like the information that you're gaining, um, uh, there's an argument to be made that it's not all that high on a page to page thing if you just accept the overall thesis, um, which takes about 180 pages to get on board with the, the main argument, you know?
  
  

  Right. So that's, that, that would be my theory on that. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, that's so I think so I, I said I haven't read Better Angels of Our Nature. Of Our Nature, but I have read Enlightenment Now and without what you're saying is exactly true. Um, I think the ones [00:14:00] before, I mean, I can't remember, this is usually a few years that I read them, but I think they might be a bit different.
  
  

  But with, um, enlightenment, now you are 100% on the, on the money. Um, because did you read, uh, sense 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Style? 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Uh, I started, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I was, I was wondering about that one. 'cause that's, that's my favorite, uh, Pinker book. So I'm wondering what your take on, on that one is. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: I think I got bored in the linguistic diagrams. How different words relate to each other.
  
  

  I dunno. I think that's, at least when I, I, this is the thing, this must have been at least five years ago that I read that or didn't read it, I guess. Um, but just to quickly about enlightenment now, because I, I exactly agree. They're, they're the ideas that, you know, this, these enlightenment values help the world get better.
  
  

  And so it, it is split into, I don't know how many chapters, but each on a different topic. And it's like, okay, now we're gonna read how war is not happening as much. It's like, it's good, but you basically, you see all the titles of the [00:15:00] chapters like poverty. Well, I can see where this one's going. Like, it's probably gonna get better over time and every chapter's like that.
  
  

  And he, I mean, he discusses all the things and it's often very, um, how should we say you do understand the issue a bit better and what some of the more subtle problems are. But yeah, it is exactly that. It is been, it is been sitting in my, on my desk more or less for like half a year now or something because I thought like, do I really want to spend time reading how these topics are getting better?
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Uh, it like, the, the thing is, is that, uh, in a way he is extremely averse to narrative, which is why his work is so powerful from an intellectual standpoint. 'cause he is not trying to trick you in any way. He is trying to just consider the evidence, but that's also why his books. Tend to be hard to read, which, because if you think about sort of what a narrative is from a reader's perspective, it is the experience of holding your book and saying, well, gee, I wonder what [00:16:00] happens in the next page.
  
  

  And then you flip that and then you find out. Whereas with the Pinker book, like you're saying, you, you hold your book and you're like, gee, I wonder what happens in the next page. The chapter is called Poverty. You know exactly what's gonna happen. You, there's no, there's no question what's gonna happen.
  
  

  And so it's, it's antithetical to what a narrative is from a reader's perspective at its core like that. But wait, before we need, we need to talk about the cold email. We need to get into this. Yeah, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: yeah. Sorry. Yeah, yeah, yeah, exactly. So you're called, you are very proud of it, clearly. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Well, no. Okay. But, so this is, so here's the thing, here's, here's, here's my theory about this is that the entire podcast, uh, that I do turns on how good that cold email is.
  
  

  That is the bottleneck, right? Because at the end of the day. Okay. Maybe a long time from now, once I've established myself, people will listen to it 'cause they are interested in me. But that's way down the road of that sort of thing happening. So, um, people's engagement with my show is going to be a function of how [00:17:00] interested they are in, um, the other people that I bring on there and how little I fuck it up.
  
  

  Um, so to the extent to which I can bring on interesting people and, um, you know, uh, allow them to be interesting without screwing it up, that's going to be success in the near term for my show. And so the bottleneck for that is, can I get interesting people that I'm excited about talking to and that other people will wanna listen to?
  
  

  So to me, it's the most crucial point of the whole enterprise, you know? 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Mm-hmm. Yeah, that's actually also, I, I've listened to the ones where I was interested in the guest, so I'm not, I'm not, I'm not at the point yet where I listen to every episode of your podcast, but I'm at that where like, eh, that sounds like an interesting guest.
  
  

  I'll listen to that one. Yeah. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: And I think that's the nature of interview podcasts is that you have a couple interviewers that you trust. Um, uh, so for me, I really like, uh, Krista Tipt on Being is, I think she's one of, she's one of the interview. Wait, what's name? Krista Tipt. Krista Tipt on being. Um, and [00:18:00] she is, um, it's, yeah, it's not really necessarily in our circle of psychology and neuroscience and that sort of stuff, uh, but she, to me is, is probably the best interviewer out there besides Oprah.
  
  

  Um, and, uh, so I, I, I take a lot from her. I take a lot from, um, Sam Harris. Uh, I even like Dak Shepherd a lot. If, if, um, uh, he's got who's Dak Shepherd? So he's this, he's this actor. He's famous for playing dumb people, but it turns out in real life, he's really smart. And, um, so he brings on everyone from, uh, academics, you know, famous academics to famous actors, and he is able to walk this line between being, uh, really dumb and really smart.
  
  

  And by doing so, he's able to encompass this really, really broad scope of humanity, right? Because there's something about dumb conversations that are attractive, right? Like, that's the majority of what reality TV is, is people doing dumb shit or [00:19:00] talking about dumb shit. Um, so there's something really important to the human experience about that.
  
  

  But yet also, you know, as academics, we, I mean, we want, we want, we want ideas, we want smart stuff. And, um, uh, you know, in being simultaneously both of those things, Dak Shepherd does that really well. Anyway, um, uh, so. Yeah. But the point is, is that you have three interviewers who are able to bring on whomever they want and are really good at what they do.
  
  

  And do you think I listen to every one of those episodes? No way. I just go through and be like, yeah, I heard of that person. They, I, you know, oh, yep, that sounds good. Or every once in a while you look at the, um, the topics of, uh, what they're talking about. I'm, I'm just describing how I do it. And so that's how I assume most other people do it.
  
  

  I think that the, um, you know, you know, there's gonna be people who really like the, um, the, the stuff that you do at a consistent enough basis that they'll put you into their every week slot. Shout out to my, my buddy Steve, who I know [00:20:00] listens every week, uh, to, uh, cognitive revolution since day one. Uh, but, uh, anyway, okay, so, okay, so it's cold email.
  
  

  I've been, I've been plugging this. Now let's, let's talk about it. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: So the, there are, there are three sections to it. Um mm-hmm. There are basically three paragraphs. So the first is. Um, it is the personalization of why I'm reaching out to this person. And it's basically me telling them how much I love their stuff, which, uh, it has to be true otherwise, like, why am I even talking to that person if there's no, if there's something I would put there.
  
  

  Um, but it's basically me just being effusive and being like, wow, look, you did this stuff and I just thought that was so great and I loved it. And, uh, look all, all that sort of stuff. And it's really just, uh, uh, you know, it's, it's, it's doing two things or it's doing a number of things, but I think two of 'em primarily.
  
  

  One is saying, look, this is not just a template email. Um, this is really, I'm reaching out to you, not just because you have a bunch of Twitter followers, but I really deeply [00:21:00] have engaged with your stuff and I care about it. Uh, and that's the first thing that everyone's gonna look for is, uh, you know, 'cause that's, even, that's how you get someone, like, even like me to reject you is if you just sent me a template thing, I'm not feeling like, oh, like whatever.
  
  

  Right? Yeah. But, um, so that's, that, that, that's a big thing. Um, uh, but then two, I mean, what, what is the best predictor of whether or not someone wants to help you? It is, uh, uh, essentially whether or not you can make them feel good by doing it. Right. And 'cause that's, that's what they get out of it at the end of the day, is it, you know, they're doing something, uh, because they want it, it feels good to them and they wanna do it.
  
  

  And so, um, sort of coming out with that and saying that, uh, I think is important. To sort of see that, the kind of emotion that you want them to feel, and then the, the other sort of ancillary consideration, um, [00:22:00] what was I gonna say? Uh, anyway, the point is, is that, um, yeah, so you, you sort of establish that you are talking to them directly and, uh, that you, you really value the work.
  
  

  Oh, the other thing I was gonna say was that, um, you know, as academics, we spend the majority of our time talking about how shitty other people's work is. Right? We someone, no one ever, you know, like when someone raises a, a, a, their hand and like talks about something in a, in a seminar, it's like, Hey, you know, thanks for the lovely presentation, but I noticed you screwed up the most important thing.
  
  

  Yeah. And that, you know, and then you dive into, right? So that's what academic discourse is like. And so that's also what creative discourse is, is, is like a lot. It's, I mean, certainly every once in a while you get someone who writes in and says, Hey, you know, I really love your stuff. And that, and that means a lot when, when someone does that, but the majority of people who are motivated to take the time to reach out and talk to you, uh, are people who want to flag something that they took umbrage with, right?
  
  

  [00:23:00] That's the nature, uh, of, of, of, you know, when people choose to reach out and, and make their opinions known is when they're pissed off about something. So, um, right. So, okay, so that's that first paragraph is establish that personal connection. Yeah. Make sense? 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yep. So, I mean, I kind of will do that. Yeah. I try to do that too, but I kind of do that later in the email.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: So what my, I mean, my template is basically, like, I describe that when I do a podcast especially. 'cause I don't have anything to show them right now. Then in the second one I say basically, this is why I want to talk to you and what I want to talk about. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: And then like, yeah. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I mean, look, I'm not gonna tell you how to do your stuff.
  
  

  Your, your thing worked with me and I thought it was good. Um, and, uh, you did, you did get to the, um, you did get to the point there, I guess I, I have, I'm surprised. I'm always surprised when people take the time to read something. Um, because I, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: yeah. Yeah. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Um, that's, that's also my 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: worry at doing it at a second.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: But here's the thing. I think they do read it. I do think they do read it. Um, but to [00:24:00]me, the first filter that people are gonna put you through is, are they reaching out to me? And if you can, if you can personalize it in that way, that's the first filter. That's the first barrier to entry. Mm-hmm. Then they're gonna look at their schedule and be like, oh, can I take on another thing?
  
  

  Or, oh, so what exactly, like you said, you may have omitted key information about what your podcast actually was, but that wasn't that super important. Uh, uh, it turns out right? Because I could kind of intuit what was happening, uh, and, and yeah. That sort of stuff. Just an observation. Okay. Second, second thing is that you have, um, the why.
  
  

  You have, why is this podcast happening? Why am I doing it? Why am I reaching out to you? All that sort of stuff. And, um, uh, this is, uh, another part of my pitch that I've refined, which is essentially that, uh, you know, as you and I have sort of talked about, I think off air, at the end of the day, academia and academics spend a lot of time talking about [00:25:00] content, but rarely do we talk about the experiences of the people who create that content or the stories behind them.
  
  

  And I think this is really valuable information for people who are in positions like you and me, who are sort of starting off as early career researchers and grad school or, or postdocs or whatever it is. And, uh, we wanna know that the people that we look up to, the people that we, uh, sort venerate were at some point in their career just like us, right?
  
  

  And went through the same sort of stuff and had the same sort of issues and also had, uh, stuff get screwed up in graduate school and had to deal with these personal things. And, and, and also that there's a human behind the science that to me, uh, is both super impor important and what I'm really interested in.
  
  

  So that's what I explained to them in that. And, um, saying that, you know, look, I think that it would be valuable to have your story as a part of this collection. Um, and then the third one, the third paragraph's really simple. It's like, look, I'm asking you to do a remote conversation for an hour, no prep.
  
  

  Hopefully it'll be fun. So super, super clear [00:26:00] ask. Yeah. And just, um, really concise. So that's the, that's the format that I, that I generally use. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah. Sounds good. Yeah, I feel like also, this is something, I mean, do you, I'm assuming you refined this over time, um, or was it, I mean, like, I, I, I took for the first one to write and I, I dunno, like how much, I must have spent like a few hours, like also because I wasn't quite sure what the podcast was gonna be.
  
  

  Yeah. So through writing that also vague. Glad to find that out, but now it's, uh, yeah, I asked someone a few days ago and that took like almost no time because I, like, I knew why I wanted to. Yeah. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yep. Everything with these sort of things is a work in progress. You have a minimum viable product. I'm a big believer in the MVP and you get it out into the world.
  
  

  Um, you try that first iteration and then you make it better every time that you do it. But here, here's something that I'm interested, real feedback. I'm interested to hear, uh, a little bit more about your vision for, for what this show is [00:27:00] and why you wanted to start it and, uh, yeah, I guess just, you know, what, what you're hoping to, to do with it and, and, and what you envision the show to be like.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Well, it's very open right now still because, I mean, there's a, so the brief answer is I don't really have a clear vision and in part that's intentional. Um, I've found that often it takes, you know, you have to do something to figure out exactly what you want to do. Um, so I remember the very first interview I did, um, with my supervisor, um, in that one.
  
  

  I just wanted to actually, that was, I think even bef. I think before I actually encountered your podcast, I was doing something more like that. And I really wanted, in his case, to kind of take him through like his academic career. Like, what did you do then? How did you go? Why did you go there? How did that process work out?
  
  

  All that kind of stuff. But then whilst I did it, I realized like, nah, uh, I'm not, like, I'd like to focus on like a few [00:28:00] individual things and then go more in depth on that rather than going through someone's career and like spending five minutes here, five minutes there, five minutes there. Um, and so I found just that with every podcast, I mean, as you said, right, every time you do something, you learn something about it and you change it.
  
  

  And right now I feel like it's still in the weird phase where, um, it is still changing quite a bit. I mean, there are a few things that I definitely want to do. One is that, um, I often, and I'm assuming most people do this, I'll read a research paper and I think this is really cool. And then you have questions about it, but you don't usually don't know the person and you usually, or often at least don't know someone who knows the person, or at least not that you know of.
  
  

  And so you're kind of just left sitting there with your questions and you can try and answer them yourself. You can ask people, but it kind of doesn't go anywhere. And um, so one hope is just that, you know, all these papers that I really like, I can just talk to [00:29:00] the author about. The paper and say like, why did you do this?
  
  

  Why you do that? You know, just kind of discuss the thing in more detail. And, um, I think that this is what academia often tries to do. Uh, you have talks, you invite people in, they talk about the research. You can ask questions, you can meet the person. But that's a very inefficient way of doing it, I think.
  
  

  'cause you have to have like 20 people or something, listen to one person at one time. And, um, you know, there's only so many questions that you can really ask in the talk. Like, as soon as there's like more than a question every five minutes, it gets annoying. So, um, part of, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: so, okay, let me see if I, if I sort of have the vibe, which would be that, so, you know, someone gets invited to your university to talk at, you know, a seminar that you have in your department, and then they give that talk.
  
  

  Then, you know, there's a couple questions afterwards. But then after that talk, you go out to a bar for a pint and it's just the two [00:30:00] of you. Uh, and then that's when you talk about, you know, sort of like, well, you know, you just said you collected the data and so what does that actually mean? And then you get really deep into that.
  
  

  But then it reminds you that, oh, well it's because, you know, there's this weird thing from way back in the day and you get off track. So is that the kind of, uh, vibe That's part 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: of it? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, it's definitely, it's this kind of, I feel like as we mentioned or as we talked about earlier, papers only include certain about certain kinds of information, even though a lot of other kinds of information is also super important.
  
  

  Um, so that's part of it. But then another thing is I just to a lot of interests and would like, you know, same thing, like to talk to the people about whatever that interest is. Um, so I'm, right now I'm trying, how should we say? I don't really want to restrict it to academia only, even though I think, uh, in the beginning probably most people will be academics.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Um, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I think to me, the way I think about that is [00:31:00] sort of a, uh, beachhead market, an initial target market that's relatively circumscribed, uh, that would broadens out over time, right? So clearly I think for both of us, you know, we're going for interviews with the kind of people who would inter interest people like ourselves, right?
  
  

  Yeah. So relatively niche market of graduate student in psychology, potentially, you know, even with specific interests, um, and saying, well, those are the people that we're going to talk to and we're going to, we're refine that and build up, um, you know, a listener base that's sort of centered around that.
  
  

  And for people who are interested in it, we are doing the thing that is going to be dead on. Or I guess I'll speak for myself. I don't know what you think about this, but anyway, this is how I think about it. You know, I, I wanna do something that's dead on for what someone like me would want to hear about, someone who's interested in the personal side of things, someone who's interested in these topics, even these, you know, sort of people and, [00:32:00] uh, in this style of long form, open-ended interview.
  
  

  And certainly those are things that not everyone is interested in, right? Even a lot of people, they don't really get the whole long form interview thing. A lot of people are, are not big on that, and they're like, you know, maybe you should cut it down to like a nice truncated 30 minutes or something like that.
  
  

  But anyway, um, you know, you start off doing that and then over time, uh, you know, you build in other people and I've got several people on my list, um, some poets that I wanna talk to that I really like, um, some musicians and, you know, sort of begin to build out into talking to other kinds of people about the way they come at their ideas from their unique and personal experiences.
  
  

  So, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: yeah, I, I heard on one in one, I can't remember which one, but in one of your podcasts you actually talk about your strategy. Um, I think you said something like, you start off very specifically for grad students and then you kind of try and build something there, and then you brought over time. [00:33:00] And I was listening to that thought.
  
  

  Oh, that sounds like a really smart thing to do. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 'cause I mean, look, if you, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: I'm not, I'm not gonna do it, but it sounds like a way better way than what I'm doing. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Well, I guess it depends on what you're trying to get out of the podcast. For me, mine, uh, is, you know, in a, in a sense, it's a platform building exercise.
  
  

  Uh, and so, uh, if you, if your goals are different for the, the podcast, um, then look, you know, talking about the content that might be just the number one, uh, priority anyway, uh, you know, there's a number of different ways to approach it there. Um, yeah, yeah. But, um, but yeah, no, I, I, I definitely want it to, uh, start with, uh, you know, 'cause Okay, look, here, here's, here's the thing, right?
  
  

  So if you have, if you set out to start the next great podcast about happiness, well, look, Lori Santos is already doing Happiness Labs with Pushkin Industries. She's gonna kick your ass 'cause she's better than you are. She's, uh, she's smarter than you are. She's got more [00:34:00] resources than you have. Uh, and, and all that sort of stuff, right?
  
  

  So it's like, okay, if you wanna go talk about happiness, great. Um, but it's going to be really hard to do something, um, that people, uh. Wouldn't already have satisfied by listening to that podcast. So for me, you have to say, well, what can I do better than anyone else? Or what, what is the thing that I sincerely, you know, want to want to do that I feel is missing that I, I, I would wanna listen to that I don't think is satisfied out there?
  
  

  And I think that's, that sounds like that's where you're coming from, was what, what do I wanna hear that I don't, uh, have access to, which is these, these kinds of in-depth conversations about the material and then go out there and create that thing. And the, the nature of, of what that looks like is that that's gonna appeal to a very small number of people at the start.
  
  

  And as you establish that, that's when you can grow to those bigger, bigger audiences. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah. I still dunno quite how to think about that because [00:35:00] in one sense, I'm very certain that what I'm doing is gonna be very niche. I mean, talking about to like one research about one paper they've read, I've written, unless that happens to be some paper that's like, you know, mentioned in like New York Times or whatever.
  
  

  Unless it's something like that, which I'm not going for, then the market's gonna be super niche. But then again, even like niche papers are often downloaded a hundred times or whatever, right? Um, so I don't know. We'll see 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: here. Here's another thing, um, that's gonna be a big benefit that you may or may not realize yet, um, which is that doing this podcast, if you think about it, it is the best possible.
  
  

  Networking opportunity in the world. And I made that in the best sense of networking, right? So you and I, uh, we're having this nice conversation. We're connecting, we're gonna know each other afterwards. If we see each other, uh, in real life, we're gonna, you know, we're gonna be buddies. And if, if that ever happens with COVID, if that ever is even a metaphysical possibility in the future, um, [00:36:00] yeah.
  
  

  And, uh, you're gonna have that week after week with, uh, whatever, whoever the people are, um, you know, people that you care about and look up to and, and wanna connect with. You're gonna have that over and over again. And so not everyone is gonna come out being your best friend, but, you know, if you, if you think about, you know, so from my perspective, a lot of the academics that I talk to, I get more in depth about who they are and the way they think about things in their personal life than they ever get with their graduate students.
  
  

  Right. 'cause most, yeah, yeah, most definitely conversations between graduate student and PI are going to be like, like they're going to be within the defined spectrum of, of, of research and that sort of stuff. And every once in a while, maybe your PI has one be or too many, and just lets a little bit slip at the, um, you know, and then you get a little insight into the mind of, of, of whoever she might be.
  
  

  Um, but, um, so the conversations that I'm having that are explicitly about, so tell me [00:37:00] about your, your personal life. Um, in a, you know, sort of historical sense, not, you know, gimme juicy details about issues at home. Yeah. Um, but, uh, you know, the, the point being that in an hour we'll get deeper, uh, than, you know, like these kind of conversations that are about, Hey, let's go deep on a topic.
  
  

  Doesn't matter if it's personal or academic, that that's a connection right there. And it's, and it's a, ultimately a relatively rare one. And so, um, even if no one listens to your podcast, uh, which I don't think will be the case because I think that's another thing that's always surprised. Surprises podcast people, everyone that I've talked to who has a podcast, um, it's like, you know, I was just shocked that anyone was do it at all.
  
  

  And actually the numbers turn out to be relatively large. Like, um, you know, what is it? Uh, two psychologists, four beers, uh, MC Kitten's. Like that's something he said. Same with Dave, uh, Zaro from very Bad Wizards that have been around since like 2012 or something like that. So no matter how silly one thinks one's own podcast [00:38:00] is, there are still people out there.
  
  

  Uh, you know, if, if you do an authentic job of it, uh, that are, that are going to tune in and be like, Hey, yeah, this is my shit right here. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah. And I mean, to me, I think also what I would imagine in for my co podcast, especially to the case is that you'll have people who own listen to one episode just because like one researcher, like for example, let's say Aaron, he has, um, a paper that's fairly famous in the field.
  
  

  Like, people who are interested in that field might listen to it, but not to anything else. So that's, but I definitely agree with the networking thing. So, um, that, that's another reason that I thought like, especially because, so what I'm doing is really at the intersection of a lot of economic psychology, neuroscience, some AI even, or sociology or whatever.
  
  

  Like it's, it's a lot of different fields and, um, I mean, in part that can just be a bit overwhelming because it's just so much information. Every field does stuff differently. Um, but I also feel like, you [00:39:00] know, just for example, we had one guest speaker who came in and who had a bit of knowledge of e of economics.
  
  

  And so I could just ask him like two, three questions and just, he could just clarify what that field was trying to do or something like that. And that just made a huge, um, it just clarified things so much more than I would have had. I tried to like, you know, read an economics textbook that I read. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: So that's why journalists interview people instead of quoting from their texts.
  
  

  Right. Um, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: yeah, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: uh, because when you, when you read an academic's paper, if you are not versed in that academic jargon, then you're gonna have a hard time getting, getting into it, even if it's a relatively basic thing, as long as the field is sufficiently sort of disparate from your, from your area of expertise.
  
  

  Um, which is why, um, you know, if you, if you read popular pieces about science, the journalist calls up the scientist. And it's like, Hey, explain this to me. And in the course of going over the same information they would cover in a paper, basically, they explain it [00:40:00] much more clearly because I mean, that's just the way, uh, linguistic communication works and one of the reasons why writing is so difficult.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah. And yeah, so that's part of that. But then, um, to the, a networking aspect that I wanted to get to was that also like, you know, my supervisor does cognitive neuroscience, these kinds of, he doesn't know many economists. He doesn't know like, whatever, like sociologists or something. Right. It's just not in, in tall as field.
  
  

  So I think, yeah, as you mentioned, like getting to, um, so like one, one idea is that I'll just also like game theories, focus on the different aspects there from all the different disciplines and talk to people from different disciplines to kind of have like one area where people can really understand that that's like a sub goal, I guess, of the podcast that will by definition lead me to get to know lots of people in the fields.
  
  

  Um, and, you know, whatever may happen from that, but I think it usually is a good [00:41:00] thing. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: So I have a couple questions from you for you, if you don't mind. Sure. Um, so the first one is, this is something I thought about a lot in the beginning, uh, of my show. And I, I know where I landed on it, but I'm interested to hear your thoughts on it right now is what you're trying to do, a conversation or an interview?
  
  

  And I think these are, uh, two very different mental models though in casual conversation. Uh, you know, it's, it's perfectly fine to sort of interchange them, uh, but the concepts, uh, that sort of people bring to them where in a conversation you basically, there's this assumption that you're gonna have 50 50, approximately 50 50, um, split of airtime.
  
  

  And that both sides are going to sometimes answer questions, sometimes ask questions, uh, and go back and forth. Whereas interview, uh, is two main differences. One is that it's, you know, 80 20 in terms of [00:42:00]airtime split. And then, uh, one side is going to be primarily asking questions and the other side will probably never ask questions.
  
  

  That's actually a really shocking thing when it happens in, um, uh, an interview. So if, if you hear, if you're listening to an interview podcast and the person who's getting interview asks the interviewer a question. You realize, whoa, I was not expecting that at all. And, uh, I, I, I, this is a trick that I learned from listening to, um, interviews with the author Elizabeth Gilbert.
  
  

  She does this really well. She's a super good interviewer and interviewee, uh, she, her, she's famous for, um, e Pray Love. Um, since that's probably a book, uh, if you started, you know, you only got a hundred, 150 pages into it, but, uh, at any rate, I haven't started that you'd yet to start. It's really good. It's really good.
  
  

  Um, but, uh, anyway, the point is, is that it violates the mental model. So interviews or [00:43:00]conversations. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, that is a good question. And it's, I think something that I've been, uh, at times c I'd say I, I think often have not made that boundary clear. And I've often, well, even when asking people, I said like, it's supposed to be a normal conversation, but then it is kind of an interview.
  
  

  Um, so I find it a bit difficult to, so I think it is technically an interview. I think most of the time I answer or I ask, sorry. Um, I ask probably more than 90% of the questions, but usually in the conversations I've had so far, the other person has also asked questions. Um, so it's not a completely, um, sided thing in terms of who asks and who answers, but most of the time.
  
  

  But
  
  

  yeah, I find it, I find it difficult. Uh, slightly difficult though, because. I think unless it is kind of conversational and low key, or rather, I think it, it kind [00:44:00] of has to be conversational low key for the other person to open up a bit and talk naturally and not kind of have this like, well this is the paper, this is what the design, you know, like formally go through the paper almost again, like, I think you, it has to be fairly conversational for the podcast to make sense in that way.
  
  

  I mean, or let's put it this way, if it was like a completely formal interview, we could do it by paper. Like we wouldn't really, you know, I could just send them a list of questions. Um, but, so yeah, somewhat probably an interview, but also a bit of a conversation. Uh, I could imagine it would also depend on who the guest is.
  
  

  Um, so if it's someone, um, you know, there's some people I want to contact soon where I've read several of their papers and I have very specific questions. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: That's probably gonna be more like an interview, but I could imagine, for example, today that this is gonna be a bit more of a conversation, or it already is more of a conversation.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. Yeah. I, um, definitely the, the casualness thing and how do, how [00:45:00] to, so there's, there's a, there's a tension here, which is that you have this red word at the bottom of the screen, which is recording. And whenever someone sees that on, they're going to be bringing this part of themselves that is this presenter kind of self, where they're trying to come off with a certain, um.
  
  

  Formality, or at least there's sort of this expectation of formality because, you know, this is, this is on record, this is forever, you know, that, that sort of thing. But like you were saying, the ideal outcome is something that, uh, um, is it's, it's, it's light, right? It's not, it's not, it's not formal. It's not, Hey, let's read the, the paper from abstract intro methods, et cetera.
  
  

  It's, you know, let's, let's, let's chat about it. Um, so yeah, how to keep up that, uh, casual nature, uh, is something that I've, [00:46:00] uh, you know, it's, it's one of those things that you, you continually are striving to, to refine how you do that and, and all those, uh, sort of things. So I definitely think that that will, uh, gain clarity for you as you go, uh, through it.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: That is actually something that I wanted to ask you about because, um, I think you do that quite well. Um, I think you do manage to have a, kind of like one thing when I was listening to some of your podcasts that I, you know, you, how you often notice the things that you are not sure, or the things that you think might be your flaws or something like that end, like after the 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: interview, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: uh, sorry.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Like, like, I do that after the interview is, uh, like, it, it ends and I say, okay, that was my interview with so and so, right? This is what I think I screwed up on that. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: All right. To even do that. Yeah. I mean it more in terms of I, yeah. Yeah. Right. You do. Did it. I forgot about that. What? Sorry, what I meant, I was trying to make a very simple point.
  
  

  You 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: okay, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: go for it. In that, um, I think when I listen to your [00:47:00] podcast, I feel like that guy's really good at making the other person feel comfortable talking to them, and I'm not sure how good I am able to do that. Um, so that was just something I wanted to ask you about, like whether, I mean, you know, it's not like here are my top three tips for making people calm, uh, like tell a joke at the beginning, you know, whatever.
  
  

  Um, but is there, yeah. Can, can you just expand on that topic a bit? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I can. So definitely that's one of the, the natural things that just, um, you know, that's easier for me. Um, uh, like, you know, it just, that comes more naturally than other things, so that's one thing. Um, but I do have a lot of strategies that I use to get better at it, um, because I do think it is actually a very difficult thing to do, no matter what your natural proclivities are.
  
  

  And so, uh, I've experimented with a lot of different things, but, um, here's a few things that I have, um, tried. Uh, so one of them is, uh, recording from the very beginning. So from the time the [00:48:00] person enters the chat, so there's no talking between us before it's on record. And I tell them that of course, beforehand, like in the email.
  
  

  Um, but one problem that I've always had is that when you have the recording going, there's this thing where, so you have your, your first 10 minutes where you talk about whatever. And then you have this downbeat where it's like, okay, I'm gonna start recording now. And then the nature of the conversation changed a little bit, and today you, uh, you know, are circumventing it by saying, okay, let's just chat for a while, while it's recording.
  
  

  And, um, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: exactly. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. Uh, and, uh, uh, you know, whenever it makes sense to start, I'll start. So that's my version of doing that. Um, so, uh, and then, and at the end, there's another thing that I've found, which is you, you stop recording and then, uh, they suddenly become even more interesting than they already were.
  
  

  They, and they they do that thing. Yeah. But that's when they ask you questions and you actually have a real conversation, um, because then now you're open, [00:49:00] uh, about all that sort of stuff. So I'm constantly asking myself that question, how the hell do you get that ending strip? Which is so good because they're, they're totally open and you get to know what they actually really think about things.
  
  

  How do you get them to do that while the recording thing is still on? Um, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: oh, that's so true. I've noticed that, like with some guests I've done, it's like, man, these people got so much funnier as soon as we stop recording. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Oh, yeah. They tell the jokes. They, and they ask you questions. They tell you the asides, they didn't.
  
  

  They do. So like, how do you get so Right. That's, that's part of the, the issue that, um, you know, we're trying to solve. Um, another thing, uh, so this is something that I stole from, uh, the interviewer, Tim Ferris, which is start off with a question that the. The person doesn't expect, right? So if you listen to that Pinker interview, right?
  
  

  So Steven Pinker interviewed at least a gazillion times every week and, um, often about the same stuff, right? 'cause he, he's tack tackled certain problems or the certain problems in the world and people want Pinker to opine on them. So what did I start off with? [00:50:00] Naturally? I started off with his collection of cowboy boots.
  
  

  Uh, and he has, you know, five or six in the closet. Uh, and I happened to, to know that, 'cause I'm both a Pinker fan and a cowboy boot aficionado. Um, and I just happened to notice he was always wearing the same pair of black cowboy boots while he was wandering around, um, seeing him out in the wild. And, uh, so we talked about that.
  
  

  And then I also happened to, uh, know from sense of style that he, um, his, his wife, uh, uh, uh, Rebecca Goldstein, sorry I I be getting that last name wrong. Anyway, Rebecca Neuberger Goldstein, uh, uh, they met, um, uh, after having read each other's writing, and he has this line in the book. It's like, I liked the author's prose so much.
  
  

  I married her. Um, and so I was like, okay, so tell me about this literary romance. And he goes into this story about how they were, uh, you know, read each other's things. They corresponded [00:51:00] briefly and then they were on this radio interview together, and that's where they. Um, uh, first hit it off. Um, and between being this sort of weird kind of cowboy boot, uh, savant and, uh, having this philosophical courtship with his, with his wife, those are the kind of things one doesn't expect from Stephen Pinker from an audience perspective.
  
  

  But then also, um, trying to jar Pinker out of, um, canned answers. Because that's the thing that you don't want, um, from whoever you're talking to, interview or conversation or whatever, is you don't want them to give the shtick that they usually give, um, that they already have down pat. You want to give them something that they, uh, have to respond to in real time that they know about and they're capable of responding to, um, but is going to elicit something that they haven't already rehearsed to the point of it being, uh, a canned response.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, I mean, I think that's probably something that I won't suffer with that much [00:52:00] because I think most people I I will be interviewing at least in the beginning will. I mean, like, I I think you also mentioned it with Maria Koff, right? I think you mentioned that at the, I think you might have mentioned that at the end of the interview with her, that it was something like you were really trying to get her not to recite the pre-planned lines.
  
  

  Yeah. Um, which is 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: hard 'cause she was 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: on book tour. Tour and that's, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: uh, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: exactly because in book, yeah. And yeah. Uh, but so you, you just try and achieve that by. Uh, asking them questions they might not expect. I mean, but the thing is, like, you could still like, so I have to say I haven't actually listened to the one Steven Pinker, your interview with Steven Pinker.
  
  

  Interestingly, in part, I think, because I feel like I've heard him being interviewed so often. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Oh yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Um, and maybe, and I was quite surprised to hear what you just said, how you, the questions you asked him. Um, and now I think I will actually go and listen to it because that sounds more interesting than what I expected.
  
  

  But, but here, so to me it still seems there's a slight problem that you can start off by those questions, but then as soon [00:53:00] as you ask like, so about your book, then they can still like switch, right? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: So I 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: could imagine at least. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: So I think this gets into what's really the hardest part of doing an interview well, which is that there's this balance between what's happening in the moment and the structure that you have sort of in your mind.
  
  

  So you can come into whatever interview or you know, what, you know, let's just use that word ambiguously right now. Um, which, so you come into the conversation and you are like, well, so, uh, I have three specific questions for this person, um, that are about their work. I have three general questions, which I ask more or less to everyone, and I have a general sense of how the things are gonna flow.
  
  

  First we're gonna talk about topic A. Then we're at some point we're gonna get into topic B. Maybe if we have time, we'll hit topic C. Um, and so as the person who is the leader of the conversation or interviewer. You have to be sensitive in [00:54:00] real time to what is actually happening, what the person is saying, what they are doing, what they're getting into detail on that you think plays well.
  
  

  'cause people, I mean, as great as tangents are, there are tangents that don't work. There are there, it is possible that it's like the person is just going off and talking about something and you're like, this isn't interesting. This is just a digression into, you know, some something and, you know, this is, it.
  
  

  It like, we just need to get back to, to something, uh, more profitable. And, uh, I mean that in a less conniving way than it sounded, but, um, yeah, yeah, no, yeah. But the, uh, the, um, the point is, is that balancing that trade off and being both attentive in the moment and, um, aware of, uh, you know, sort of the producer's role of, of, of what are we talking about here?
  
  

  Um, are we covering the things that I think would be interesting to covering? Are we going in depth enough in them? Are we going to finish this topic in time to get to the next one and [00:55:00] however much time this person gave me. Um, all of those things doing that really well. And, you know, sort of the abstract collection of all those considerations is what makes, um, that is the sort of, that is the prime, that is the center of gravity of what a, a solid interview is.
  
  

  And that's the hardest sort of skill, I think to, to, to, to, to develop over time. And, um, so yeah, that, that plays into what you were saying, which is like, okay, you can start off however you want, but then you have to, um, uh, but you like it, it still has to have some sort of arc that's going to be, uh, comprehensible to whoever is listening and the audience point of view.
  
  

  So one thing that I, one sort of strategy that I use, um, for that is that, okay, so you can have interview questions. Everyone's familiar with the concept of a question, and that's what you expect interviewers to have interviews to have. But, um, I often think [00:56:00] of what I'm trying to do as, uh, a handful of things that I'm trying to get to the bottom of.
  
  

  Right? So you have, uh, maybe you have a question which is like, okay, so I saw that you, um, started your, uh, your career studying moral psychology and then you transitioned into hardcore electrophysiology. What was the nature of that transition? So you have a question that was what I just asked, but it's in service of getting to the bottom of something.
  
  

  What, what, what inspired this transition? And so when they start to answer that question, um, maybe they don't quite get to something that speaks to the nature of that transition. They go off and be like, well, you know, like, whatever, whatever. Uh, and so you have to think, okay, well let me, in your mind, you have to say, well, okay, so let me, let me try and revamp that and.
  
  

  Dig into something that they said or frame it in a different way, uh, that helps me get to the bottom of the thing that I'm trying to get to. And so that conceptual [00:57:00] model of having a handful of things you wanna get to the bottom of, and some working hypotheses about what kind of questions might get you there, that helps negotiates keeping all of those things in mind of, are we making sense?
  
  

  Are we doing something vaguely coherent? Um, uh, is this person giving me the right tone that I want? And all that sort of stuff.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah. Yeah, I agree. That is to me also the, by far hardest part that you're basically trying to do two things at once. You're trying to have a conversation and you're trying to, uh, you not work through a structure, but yeah, you have a goal. And I mean, so that's why, for example, now I have these, these notes here, but they're, they're way less than they used to be in the first few interviews.
  
  

  So the, well, the first one I didn't prepare at all. Right, okay. Can't do that. Yeah. Should be more. But you learned that the second one? Yeah, the second one I went, okay. So I had like all these things and these papers I wanted to cover and things I wanted them to say, but that was obviously, I was just like, um, putting words into their mouth.
  
  

  So that's why I just ditched all of those and started [00:58:00] again. And now I kind of just have like, almost like you said, like a few topics, um, that, or questions that I'd like to talk about. And then it's always just trying to steer to the towards that. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: So I mentioned I had two questions for you. I asked one 'em a long time ago.
  
  

  The second one was gonna be about structure. So, yeah, you, in your email to me, when you reached out, uh, or you know, when you told me more specifics about what was gonna happen, um, you said it was gonna be pretty open-ended. You weren't going to come in, uh, with a lot of questions and, uh, I have tried both, you know, sort of approaches from being very, uh, married to a handful of questions to like, fuck it.
  
  

  Let's just, let's just, you know, whatever happens, happens, man. Let's just have it be free flow. And that, that latter one does not work. Um, it's very difficult to do. It's very difficult to do. Um, and, uh, so I'm wondering how you're currently thinking about that, um, what you've been testing, uh, what any troubles that you have, whatever, [00:59:00] whatever, I don't know, whatever in that space of things you've been thinking about.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: I think this might be something that I then didn't, how should we say, communicate quite as clearly, um, to you, because in a way I do have a structure. It's just, I guess the point I wanted to make there was that it's not, you know, as I said, I don't have like 20 questions and then I would just go, okay, question number one, and then you say something.
  
  

  I'll say, okay, thank you. Question number two, as if like, you know, if I'm not gonna react to that. So I kind of wanted to just say like, it's not gonna be that, because the truth is like now, I mean, when I look at my notes, I have. So I want to talk to you about podcasting just because, uh, we, we share that and in common and because there's stuff I can learn from you.
  
  

  And then I have like other stuff I'd like to talk about is how you managed to combine this with doing a PhD and all this kinda stuff. And, um, if we get to it, then also this preprint you have. Um, and so I do kind of have that structure roughly in mind and, but I guess, and I do [01:00:00] have like questions or things I want to address in each of them.
  
  

  I just stopped writing those down because I feel like I kept focusing too much on the specifics of the question rather than being in the moment and having the conversation. So, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: And then, I mean, it's difficult for me to talk about like how this has changed for me much because I've only done five interviews so far.
  
  

  Right. So you'll you're the sixth or you're the fourth person I'm interviewing, but it's the sixth interview and so yeah, I went from no structure at all to Okay. That doesn't work. To, um, hi. Very structured. That doesn't work either. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: to now I'm just, yeah, somewhere between where I have a few points I want to hit and um, sometimes, I mean, sometimes I do have very specific questions, uh, like for example, the one I asked you earlier about what you do kind to make the person feel at ease or feel kind of relaxed and calm.
  
  

  But yeah, mainly it's just these are topics I think. I think maybe this is more how I think about it. It's more like this is a topic that could lead to something interesting. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: And then we kind of see what happens a hundred percent. [01:01:00] If I manage to get those questions in that are on the back of my mind, great.
  
  

  If not, well, whatever. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. You know, another quick thing about the, um, um, trying to make people feel comfortable is that you have to be sensitive to what people are most confident talking about. So, uh, academics, um, are, they often have a hard time telling personal anecdotes and stories and that sort of stuff, and so you have to, but some of 'em, they'll just give it to you and it's amazing and you just, you like give 'em one question and they just talk for an hour and a half.
  
  

  You're like, great. That's the podcast. Thanks. Um, Bradley Boy Tech was like that, that was like the most fun because I like the, the podcast is like an hour and a half and I asked him four questions and the guy just goes off and he also, oh, I haven't listened to that one yet. He was also able to do this.
  
  

  Amazing. He was also able to do this amazing narrative thing where he would, uh, do this thing where it's like, okay, so, you know, here's the thing you asked about. And you know, like, here's, there's the weird thing that happened, but in order to understand that you have to go back to the beginning and then [01:02:00] you'd start off on this ridiculously far off tangent, and then you're like, after like 10 minutes from on it, you're like, where the fuck is this going?
  
  

  And then it would invariably come back to exactly where he said it would without him having to plan it at all's cool. And it was brilliant. I loved it. Um, but I didn't, I didn't say, I hardly said, you know, 20 words in the whole thing. Um, anyway, so being sensitive to what people are. Most comfortable sort of the mode that they operate in and trying to bring out the best in that, because you're not trying to force 'em to do something different than that.
  
  

  You're just trying to bring out the best version of them. That's your sort of overall goal as a, an interviewer. Um, but in terms of just the, the single easiest, so this is, this is, this is, this is a hack, um, that I found to be really useful for interviewing. And so I stole this idea from Ira Glass, um, which is, there's one question that will always work really well, which is, and how did that turn out differently than you expected?
  
  

  Um, that's the question. And [01:03:00] so the reason this, this works really well is because, so for particularly what I'm looking for, it's a little bit different if you're just about the ideas and stuff, but especially if you're, if you're interested in the, the personal stuff, what makes for good interview content is a couple different things.
  
  

  So you want, um, a story, you want the anecdote, um, uh, and then you want how they felt about it. And so when you ask this, so, so you want someone to say, uh, their ideal answer is like, okay, so, uh, you know, uh, I was in this situation and here's what happened, and you go through the story and then that's how I felt about it, right?
  
  

  So that's what you're trying to get at. And um, the way reason this question works is because it gets you two things. So one is it gets you the story. So what happened? That's, you have to describe that in order to describe how it's different than expectation, but because you have to describe expectation, it also gives you a theory about how the world worked.
  
  

  So they, they'll, they'll basically, it e lists a response. It's like, so this was my theory of the world. This is how I, things, this is how I thought things [01:04:00] worked. And then they tell the story, and then at the end of the story, you get their emotional response, but you also get their updated worldview. So it's like, now I realize that this theory was not actually how it, it, it worked, but it was a, a different thing.
  
  

  So that's a question that I always sprinkle in there somewhere, um, when I'm trying to get more out of someone is how did that, how did that turn out differently than you expected? Also, good if you're talking to just like a friend in a casual conversation and you wanna get them to talk a little bit more, I employ that in my personal life as well.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, that does intuitively sound like a great question. And now I, uh, I, I don't wanna like copy questions one-to-one, but that does sound like a 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: really great question. That's, that, that's, that's one you should steal for sure. Anyway, I could talk about theory of interviewing all day too long for sure. Uh, and I, uh, uh, I feel like I'm railroading this conversation to that.
  
  

  So if you want to actually no. I wanna ask you, um, so, uh, [01:05:00] you are starting a podcast. Uh, you're in the opening stages of it. Yes. At what point in your PhD. Were you like, oh, I've got all this time on my hands. Uh, I wanna, you know, what the, uh, you know, I wanna start a, start a podcast. What, uh, what, what's your sort of, yeah, how did, how did you get into this?
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: That is slightly difficult to answer because I mean, officially in a way, I started either, I started just after our lab did like a Corona lockdown in March, or our institute, or I started before that, I can't remember. Um, so in a way it did kind of coincide with me commuting less, me being, you know, just having more time at my hands in that sense.
  
  

  But I have been wanting to do it for a while. And I think the main reason, I mean, part of it is probably just because now I had a bit more time because of the whole COVID situation. [01:06:00] But then again, I think that might be more coincidence in the sense that this has been something I've been wanting to do for a few years.
  
  

  And it kind of just, you know, it's been bubbling and getting a bit stronger all the time and it happened to kind of, uh, reach a, a threshold where I said, okay, I'm just gonna do this now when the COVID situation happened. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Um, so yeah, I think, yeah, it was around that time. I can't tell you exactly when.
  
  

  Um, but it would've been around March when I started. Then it took me a while to figure out how to do the interview stuff. Then I did a few, then that didn't go that well. So then it took me a bit longer to figure out how to do it properly. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: And so I've been, I mean, after doing this now in the sense properly, um, for the last two, three weeks, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: yeah.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Um, since then I've been using this software and the setup. Um, but yeah, technically since I think I did my first interview in early April, [01:07:00] something like that, but I'm not sure I have too much time at my hands though. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah, that's, see that's the thing, is that everyone has the, has the idea at some point, which is like, you know what?
  
  

  I just start a podcast, right? Everyone's got a pod, why can't I? Uh, but there is, there's a big startup cost to it. And so that's, that's, um, one of the ways I've, uh, so first of all, you know, we've mentioned, okay, so how do you balance, um, you know, being a PhD student, having a podcast? First of all, I'll flag up front.
  
  

  I haven't been doing a great job of it. I'm, I'm, I'm currently behind on my PhD work. Um, mostly it's because of COVID. Um, but, uh, certainly, uh, you know, uh, I, I can't say that I'm speaking from a point of like, well, you know, you know, everything's flawless over here, so let me speak from my position of authority.
  
  

  Um, let me tell you how to do it. So, um, I just wanna mark that [01:08:00] caveat upfront. Um, and so, you know, take, take whatever I say, uh, you know, interpret it with, with, with that in mind. But one thing that I will say is that when I started off this podcast, cognitive revolution, that I, um. Sort thought about going into it was, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: sorry, I think you are fidgeting with something 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: that I am Sorry.
  
  

  I'm fucking with something right next to 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Okay, that's fine. Yeah, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I've been trying not to tap the table 'cause the, the, um, the thing is so sensitive, the, um, you know, to, to the laptop or to tapping and whatever. Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Anyway, so that was just a, yeah. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: So one of the things that I, I thought about a lot when I was starting off, uh, cognitive revolution was that I knew it couldn't take up my entire life, right?
  
  

  Like, you know, some of these podcasts that are very well produced, um, you know, they take a team of people and, you know, months to, to pull off and that sort of stuff. It's like, okay, so I know I can't do that and so I have to do something [01:09:00] that respects the amount of time that I have to give to it. And so when I started off, I thought a lot about how I wanted to optimize that.
  
  

  And I guess there's two different stages of that. One was that, uh, and I think, you know, you took advantage of this opportunity, which was that you need. Uh, some time to get things going. 'cause there's lots of little things. There's like, okay, you know, what technology are we gonna use to record stuff? What technology are we gonna use to edit stuff?
  
  

  How do you edit stuff? Uh, what mics am I gonna use? Well, what's I, what kind of questions should I ask? You know, like, how do I send an email to people, uh, and what am I gonna have music? Well, where am I gonna get that music from? There's gotta be a logo who's gonna make the logo? Right. And the answer when you're starting off is that you're gonna do all these things.
  
  

  And, um, by 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: the way, I've been ignoring most of those questions, but I, I don't have a logo yet. I still don't really have a name. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Uh, and I, I think actually I'm gonna go without music altogether. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Uh, I think 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: that's how I'm gonna solve that problem. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yep. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: But yeah, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: that is certainly one [01:10:00] solution to the problem.
  
  

  Um, but, so anyway, the, the, the point generally, and even having omitted some of these things you'll appreciate it, is, um, there's so many little things to, to start off with and that is really tough to do, um, when you are engaged in full-time grads, grad school stuff. And so I did that before I came to grad school.
  
  

  I knew this was something that I wanted to do. And so the first, so the, the, the two months before I started, sorry, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: how long has your podcast been going for? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Since October of last year. So this October will be one year. Um, and, uh, when, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: and you started grad school? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah, I started grad school at Oxford last fall, um, in that October.
  
  

  So basically it coincided right with the beginning. Right. So I, I, I started off, you know, a couple months. Before, um, grad school, I was like, I'm gonna do this. And I started putting all this stuff together and doing the initial interviews and all that sort of stuff. And then, uh, you know, I had a few interviews in the bank and then those dropped basically right on the downbeat of my, the beginning of my grad school term.
  
  

  And, uh, so [01:11:00] that happened and, um, that was overall calibrated pretty well because I would not have wanted to be dealing with the sort of auxiliary sort of nitty gritty stuff like that at the beginning. I sort of want the wheel to be turning a little bit. Uh, and using COVID downtime, I think is a, a good time for, but I, I think that's a barrier entry for a lot of people, especially if they're doing it on their own, is that the startup costs are relatively hot.
  
  

  But if you play your cards right, and this is the second phase of what I was talking about, um, then, uh, you, it's not, it's not no work, but, um, you, you can keep the wheel of the podcast turning with relatively minimal work and um, you know, so you've got your emails that you're gonna send and once you've got that dialed in, it still takes some time.
  
  

  'cause you have to write, you know, that personal section, uh, at least in my scheme of things. And that still does take, you know, a decent amount of time, not two hours or whatever, but still it, it, it takes [01:12:00]legitimate thought and, and all that sort of stuff. Uh, and then you have to prep for the interview. So that's, that's one thing where I really cut down on time.
  
  

  Is that because my interviews are not necessarily about content, and I usually have a vague idea of what the person's content is. Um, I don't have to do prep work. I don't have to read the book. I don't have to read three papers. Um, and so I do 30 minutes of prep before I talk to someone. I go to their website, I go to their Twitter, uh, I go to their cv, I go to their Google Scholar top, um, papers.
  
  

  And I, um, have my, uh, I select from my list of sort of, uh, general questions. And, um, then I, uh, you know, here's a handful of ones I think would be interesting to ask them and then, um, come up with some specific questions about their particular trajectory. And so that's 30 minutes of prep. Um, but that's really crucial 'cause I don't have to do, I don't have to spend a bunch of time [01:13:00] studying their stuff.
  
  

  And then, you know, the interview takes an hour, um, and then, uh, you know, probably takes about two x whatever the length of the interview is to edit it. And then there is some time dedicated to publishing it. But overall, you know, we're talking on the order of three or four hours to produce an episode. Um, which if you're doing an episode a week, you can do that, you can do that.
  
  

  Um, it's extra work, but you can do that. Uh, so that, that's sort of how I, I manage it. Also, just, um, you know, failing to. Live up to a number of requirements in my program is another way to find that top. So pick whichever 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: strategy 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: works for you. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, that is a question I wanted to ask you, like how much prep time you do, because I am, for what I do right now, I mean, I'm asking people who've paper, who've stuff I will already read.
  
  

  I'm not, you know, just going out to someone. I have no idea what they're doing. Um, so in the sense, like I have in a way [01:14:00] done like hours and hours of prep work, but that can often be a while ago. Uh, but yeah, I do still usually read two, three papers now, or a book or, or both. Um, so yeah, that is something I've noticed.
  
  

  Like it, um, I spent more than half an hour prep. Um, actually this was the, this was the only interview now though, for which I didn't like in that sense. Um, well for example, for the, for the preprint if we get to it later, I intentionally didn't read that because I thought it would be more interesting to hear it from you directly.
  
  

  Um, yeah, half, half an hour prep would be a dream at this stage. Um, so 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: that's, that's, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: but then again, I should also say I'm trying to do one episode every two weeks. So I guess that kind of evens out in a way, in that I probably spent more like four hours prepping, but I don't do an episode that week. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yep.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Um, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: so I mean, these are all parameters that you can vary based off how much time you have to give it and what you're going for. Right. So for me, um, I want to talk about the personal [01:15:00] stuff and you just, there's, you can't do any research about that ahead of time. Um, so that actually plays into, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: without becoming a 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: minor stalker.
  
  

  Yeah, I'm, I'm sure there are ways, but they're, they're not necessarily appropriate for the, the, the situation at hand. Um, but so that, that, that is a, that's not just, oh, I'm, I'm omitting necessary work. Um, but that's actually, um, you know, something and sure, uh, I could dedicate more time to prep and, but it's all about trade offs, right?
  
  

  Is that, is that the best use of my time? And, and so that's, uh, there's, there's that sort of thing. And, you know, editing you can do, uh, editing can take up as much time as you are willing to give it. Um, so that's just something you have to say. This is, this is, so, these are all, these are all things that you, um, just say, well, here's what I have to give and I'm gonna make executive decisions about how I'm gonna do it.
  
  

  Right. And so for me, I wanna do one, one a week. I ideally, um, [01:16:00] because, you know, as we've talked about, uh, it's, it's not everyone's gonna listen to every one of your episodes. People are gonna come in when they find the person. Interesting. So, to me, um, it, part of what I wanna do with my interview podcast is build up a repository of people that, you know, uh, uh, you know, once people listen to a couple people they really like, and they sort of trust me as an interviewer to ask interesting questions and do a decent job, then they'll go through the back catalog.
  
  

  And I said, oh, you know, okay, I'll, I'll put this one in the queue. And uh, that's kind of how I imagined that, that sort of process going. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: That's what I did. Yep. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Great to know that that's, uh, you know, end of one, uh, holds the vitro. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Exactly. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Um, and, uh, and, uh, yeah, so the, the point there is that if I can take, you know, not shortcuts, but if I can, if I can, um, optimize things to come out with a, [01:17:00] a, a larger end of people that I've interviewed, uh, then that is going to accomplish my goals then more so than if I chose to dedicate, you know, some amount of time to some other part of it.
  
  

  So that's just in my scheme, how I've sort of chosen to allocate time. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, definitely. I think this is a big, I mean, the difference here is just what we're trying to do, right? Um, so I mean, the thing is like you are, I'm assuming interviewing people who you have, you have read their stuff just not right now.
  
  

  And in preparation for the podcast, it's not like you are, you know, you went to Google Scholar to sociology, looked at who had the most citations. I interviewed them. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Mark cbe. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, exactly. I'm assuming 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: that's, that's this guy. Mark Grand of better. All right, let's hit him up. Sounds interesting, mark. Better.
  
  

  I mean, uh, uh, you know, he's famous from the Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell and, um, and, uh, also [01:18:00] badass sociology papers. So, but um, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: yeah, I actually haven't read any of those, but I listened to, I actually really liked that podcast, so that's, um, one of the ones of yours I like. Oh, that's 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: nice. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Oh, well, the ones I listened to.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: And I liked, so like all the others I listened to didn't like. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: That's, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: but actually I wanted to, actually, this reminds me of something I wanted to mention earlier, because you said, um, one thing that's interesting if you have an interview podcast is when the, uh, interviewee starts asking questions.
  
  

  And I felt that that was slightly the case in your interview with Mark Gran, because it seemed to me like towards, I don't know, two thirds or something. He seemed, it seemed to me like he was getting interested in you and what you were doing, and then there was a point where it switched and he almost started asking you questions.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Oh, yeah. And I, that's why that was one of my favorite interviews is because that happened and you can't, you, I mean, you can't make the other person do that. You can't like, see, see them at the beginning and say, Hey, like towards the end, could you ask me some questions about what everything might be interesting about me?
  
  

  Um, so it's kind of a moment of magic when it happened, but it really did, and that's why I loved that interview is 'cause I felt like at the end of it, [01:19:00] mark and I were like buddies. Like we, we corresponded since it's like, you know, I sent him that paper that we were talking about. Uh, I read his 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Oh yeah.
  
  

  Has he, has he? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Oh yeah. He sent me back this nice email of like, some, uh, things that he liked about, he read the thing He, like, he, I, he was like, here are some points on how I think it can be improved. Things that were omitted or arguments I didn't quite buy. Uh, and, uh, that's amazing. You know, uh, we made, um, uh, some like offhand academic jokes about the, um, American Studies Scholar Perry Miller.
  
  

  He's not well known outside of the humanities all, but if you. Uh, in, in the, in like, I don't know, it would be the appropriate scope of like an English department, like Perry, Miller is this like behemoth in the field, uh, that was famous for, um, sort of studying puritans and that sort of stuff, which is why us social neuroscientists have never heard of him typically is because he's not germane to our field to say, oh, but we made these really, you know, sort of niche jokes, uh, about that.
  
  

  So like that was [01:20:00] okay. But that was the, the point is, is that that was why that, uh, interview came off as well as it did, I think is because by the end, you not only had learned about Mark Granite and his work, but you felt like you got to see a friendship, um, you know, sort of emerge in that way. And that was a really cool, uh, effect, uh, that I I, I thought the interview, you know, maybe captured a little bit.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, it's, it's cool. I guess, well, I guess for you it's cool that, that, to learn that that came across that way, but for me it's also cool to kind of hear that, um, I didn't just imagine that I, I did find that really interesting and I was wondering at the end like, did I imagine him taking interest or, that is, that is really cool.
  
  

  One thing I was interested in especially is like, you know, talking about trying to combine these different things. So I mean, not only are you doing a PhD in podcasting, but also as far as I can tell writing, um, I didn't look at when you published your essays and that kind of stuff, but it seems like you're doing this still.
  
  

  Right. And there was this one essay of yours. [01:21:00] Um, that I read, I can't remember what it's called, uh, but where you like outline your schedule, like the, and the difference between planned and actual or something like that. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Oh, sure. Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Um, I was like, what? The first thing that I found interesting about that is that it seems like you spent, I think you said like your most, your, your most productive hours are like in the morning.
  
  

  And then you, what, what just surprised me is that you're spending none of that on your PhD, at least in that outline. It was something like writing, podcast, writing, writing, writing or something like that. And I was just curious, is that, uh, is that, like, that just surprised me because for me, the PO that the PhD kind of work comes first and then the other stuff is secondary.
  
  

  Um, and 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: that's a very astute observation. Um, look. Okay, so there's a couple, there's a couple different things at play here. So one, I mean, empirically speaking, you know, that's why the podcast has gotten, you know, the traction that it has. And there are a steady stream of essays coming out and there, [01:22:00] uh, and my academic work is still in pre-print and everything.
  
  

  So I mean, you get returns on the things that you put your most productive time into and, um, ultimately, so, so, okay, so, so here's, here's the, the thing that is the additional information you don't have yet, which is that that is now flipped and one of the reasons why cognitive Revolution hasn't come out recently and um, uh, all that sort of stuff is that I, uh.
  
  

  Podcasting's going well enough, writing's going well enough. Um, I've hit the goals that I wanted to have on that, um, for, for this year. And, um, I, I hit the marks that I, that I want, and, um, I'm really happy about that. And, but those are sort of in motion now. And so, um, those need to take less priority. And, uh, so I have flipped that now to where science is coming first.
  
  

  I need to kick some serious ass on my PhD in the near future [01:23:00] and get, uh, back on track. So that is your, your perception is correct there. And there's that additional piece of information, um, that that's, uh, um, you know, is the sort of antidote to, to, to the issue you, you identify. But, um, the other thing is, is that, you know, at the end of the day, um, it's really hard to get an academic job, especially an academic job that one might want.
  
  

  Uh, and so, um, I, uh, I will try my damnedest to do good academic research and to find a postdoc and eventually faculty position that suits me, but I'm not married to it. And, um, uh, I do like research, I do like ideas. Um, and I, um, you know, we'll talk about this, you know, some of the stuff that I'm working on.
  
  

  I'm hoping that, you know, people find it worthwhile. And if they do, then maybe there's, there's a, a future there. But at the end of the day, I know for sure that I want to have some sort of [01:24:00] public facing, uh, you know, aspect of my career, whether it's podcasting and writing and all this sort of stuff. And, um, you know, I described my podcast as an exercise in platform building, and that, uh, sort of is in service of this.
  
  

  It's not just a side project that I, I think would be cool, even though, you know, in some sense that's what it is, but it's also a, um, it is, it is, uh, an early step toward developing this sort of thing into a career, right? And, um, I think podcasts are an excellent way to build a connection with, um, uh, you know, not necessarily followers or whatever you wanna call them, but a group of people who are interested in you and your work and the way that you think and the way you interact with people in the world.
  
  

  And, um, podcasts have, uh, a relatively low barrier to entry for [01:25:00] listeners like that with a relatively high, uh, sort of return on their investment in you because they, you know, they hear your voice's very personal. You're talking to someone they care about. Um, you can, because that's, that's the other thing from a marketing perspective, is that.
  
  

  In an interview podcast, I get to temporarily take on someone else's audience as my own, right? So there's huge variation between whether or not you have Paul Bloom on the podcast versus someone who, um, you know, people don't know as much and people are always gonna listen to the Stephen Pinker and Paul Bloom ones more so, or, you know, if you have someone on people love like Sander Vander Linden or something like that, um, that's gonna draw a bunch people.
  
  

  But at the end of the day, Susan Fisk, even though she's like the greatest person in the history of the world, um, she's not a public figure in the same way. Um, so super interesting interview. Awesome. Um, but, uh, uh, you know, anyway, the point is, is that different people bring [01:26:00] different audiences and you get to sort of co-opt it temporarily and draw in a small chunk of those people to be interested in your own stuff.
  
  

  Potentially. They'll just keep an eye on whether or not you have future interesting people or look at the back catalog, like we were saying. So anyway, um, this podcast and, um, my writing and what I wanna do is done with an, with a, an eye towards building a career out of it. Um, either its own sort of, you know, deal or as, uh, an add-on to my academic career.
  
  

  It's sort of a matter of which one. Goes, well, you know, where the, 'cause you know, part of it's always gonna be about, you know, do you get a break somewhere? Um, part of it's gonna be about how much work are you putting into it and that sort of stuff. And, um, so I know this is something that I wanna do. It's something that I wanna have as an aspect of my career, and this is a sort of introduction for me to, to do it.
  
  

  Does that make sense? 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Yeah, definitely. And what's, what I found interesting is that I think for the third or fourth time you've almost answered a question I was gonna [01:27:00] ask. Like, I had like one question and then I had one building up to that, and you basically went there anyway. So one question I wanted to ask was like, uh, to what extent, like what you see after was you're, finish with your PhD, like what you want to do?
  
  

  Because I feel like I, I, I basically still assume I'm going to do a postdoc and these kind of things, but I am, I do notice, like, how should we say, um, you know, you can do a lot of research without being employed at a university. Um, at least, I mean, you probably need some sort of collaborator if you want.
  
  

  I mean, if you want to do neuro imaging or something like that. Um, but I've, I'm also working on samsa that's fairly theoretical or that can be done for not that much money. So I do wonder sometimes, like whether it might, you know, I'd I take like a part-time postdoc or something like that. Just get rid of like all the administrative stuff that usually comes with being academic.
  
  

  But it's, yeah. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: You know, the whole academia thing, being a professor, being, [01:28:00] uh, you know, a postdoc, gosh, like, there is so much, there's so much bad stuff involved in this. And, you know, uh, I almost feel like people like us, we get so into it and so on this track. And, uh, you know, we just love the concepts and, and what we're doing and that sort of stuff.
  
  

  Uh, that, and we're told, like, it's, it's very, it's also very appealing, right? There's this very concrete path. So it's like, okay, you do your undergraduate, yeah, you do your masters, you do your PhD, you get a postdoc for three years. You become, um, uh, an assistant professor. You become, uh, an associate professor and then you get tenure, right?
  
  

  You know, you get tenure in after assistant professor. Uh, but the point is, is that there's a very, you know, linear thing, here are the signposts and that's very tempting. 'cause most things in life don't give you something, um, something that explicit about that. And so I feel like especially not writing, especially not writing, especially not, you know, oh, so, you know, like, so what's this alternative career that I'm working on?
  
  

  It's like, oh, you're gonna be a, [01:29:00] well, you know, you gonna be a, a public intellectual. Like, what do you, what is it? Does that even, what is it? You know, a writer? It's like, ugh, no, it's like Earnest Hemingway's, right? I'm not a writer. Um, but, um. No. The point is, is that, yeah, so I think pursue the academic stuff, um, uh, do it.
  
  

  But at the end of the day, don't forget that you're doing it because you love the research and the ideas. Um, but if you get married to that and say like, oh, I won't be happy doing anything else, fuck, you're putting yourself in a tough situation because there's a lot that can go wrong there. And then you are married to a very, very sub op.
  
  

  'cause look, at the end of the day, it is a lot better to be outside of academia. Um, like just street, strictly speaking in terms of personal happiness, you can choose the city that you wanna live in and you can go with your partner. If, if, if you know she gets a cool job somewhere else, you um, you get [01:30:00] paid an actual amount of money like other people get, like.
  
  

  They get like, not just like, oh, I can eat this week and pay for rent, but it's like they can actually do stuff. Um, uh, you, you know, you, you, like, there are interesting problems outside of academic problems. They get to do cool stuff and it, and, and more people get to engage with it. So there's all these things, it's like, oh, outside world actually is a really good thing.
  
  

  And sometimes we forget about it. But anyway, the point that I'm trying to make for me is that the way I think about it is like, yes, I'm gonna give it my all. I still think it'd be really cool to do academia, but I'm not gonna throw all of my eggs into that one basket. I'm gonna have other stuff going on, and I know I'm gonna do this in some form later on.
  
  

  Uh, if it turns out, well, maybe it can be its own thing, but certainly what I'm doing now is an initial investment in a longer term vision. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Mm-hmm. Cool. Um, shall we then talk about your podcast now? Your other podcast? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: So, um, yeah. So, um, speaking [01:31:00] of, uh, not making sufficient progress on my PhD research, um, over, uh, the COVID period, I actually have been developing a new podcast.
  
  

  And this one is not an interview based podcast. It's more of a, a story episodic podcast where it comes out, there'll be a, a, um, an initial installment of I think 10 episodes in a first season. So it'll be, you know, those 10 episodes will exist and second season will come at some point in the future if I ever get around to it.
  
  

  Um, but um, but it's not planned to be a, you know, a or whatever. It's not gonna be every, it's not gonna be, it's some set timeline where, you know, the seasons are gonna come out at a certain point or it's not like I'm gonna do it, like cognitive revolution, where the ideal is to have a new episode every week.
  
  

  Um, and so, yeah, the podcast is, it's actually a travel podcast. And so, um, the, the basic setup is that it's not necessarily discussing ideas, but it's basically [01:32:00] travel log stories about places, um, that I've seen in places that I've been and, um, trying to recreate the images and feelings and all that sort of stuff of, of those adventures and sort of the, I dunno, the, the kind of, the conceptual motivation for it is that, so, you know, from cognitive revolution, clearly I'm interested in this strain of person that's, uh, the, the intellectual or the scientist or the writer or whatever you wanna call it.
  
  

  Clearly that's, that's, that's something that I'm very interested in and wanna dig into. But there's another kind of person that I haven't. It's also of real interest to me. It's not so much in that same kind of, uh, sphere, and it's the traveler. So the, the people who go out there into a foreign place or something they're unfamiliar with and they come back and they try and relate what they saw, make sense of it, and give everyone else an idea of what's going on out there in the world.
  
  

  And this is something, um, that [01:33:00] I've been drawn to in a lot of different formats. Um, one of my favorite writers of all time is Bill Bryson. And, um, you know, he's written some famous travel books, uh, about Europe, small town America, England, Australia. Um, and I really like those books and, and particularly the audio book versions of it.
  
  

  'cause there's this very intimate thing, uh, in an audio book or in a podcast, which is that someone else gets to take over your, um, internal monologue, right? Like that's, that's what's happening when you listen to someone else's voice like that in your headphones or whatever. And that's an extremely intimate thing someone else gets to take over your internal monologue.
  
  

  And so with him describing these vivid, vivid images of things that he's seen and, and doing it in this sort of stylized way, um, those have been some of my favorite audio experiences, especially in moments where I'm feeling trapped in a place like during winter in Boston. Good god. Um, or, um, [01:34:00] uh, you know, just when, when I, when I, you know, feeling like I wanna get out there and, and see it again.
  
  

  So I've been working on this. You know, travel writing vaguely in that vein of things for a number of years now, but it's, it's very hard to find a, a, an outlet for it, a place to publish it, especially the longer form stuff. And, um, so basically I took, um, downtime during COVID to revisit some of those essays that I had previously written, write a couple more of them and sort of put them into something that basically resembles an audio book format.
  
  

  It's about, it's basically an audio book broken up into, um, podcast episodes. And so, um, I talk about, uh, you know, just different places. They include Moscow, uh, St. Petersburg, Istanbul, uh, South Africa, a small country in the middle of South Africa called Lisutu, and then some places in Asia, including Hong Kong and Myanmar.
  
  

  And so each of them, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: so just to [01:35:00] interrupt briefly, each episode is about one place. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: And uh, the other thing is it's an essay where you read it or is there also like some sort of audio, uh, like some sort of sound effects or music or whatever? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: it's sounds like an idea of what to imagine what it's gonna be like.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: You know, it's, it's basically that red essay type of thing and, um, you know, uh, at a first approximation, whatever an author does when they read their audiobook, that's kind of what I'm going for. And I've always liked audiobooks that are read by the author. Um, it just gives you that added layer of intimacy and yeah, in the best case scenario, it would, you know, sort of, um, reach that, uh, you know, level of, of sort of co-opting ones, internal monologue.
  
  

  And, you know, uh, I'll let everyone decide, you know, it how they, whether or not they feel it's attained this, but the, um, the goal is, is for, for it to be light and, and funny and engaging and to really make you feel like you [01:36:00] are, are going to one of these, uh, places and, and, and seeing these things. So it's supposed to be vivid and there's some drawing in of, uh, ideas and, and that sort of stuff and, and concepts and, and, um, you know, uh, sort of that, that intellectual edge and that sort of thing.
  
  

  Um, but, uh, a lot of it's really about trying to hit that note of, of, of just bringing in these vivid images and, um, a, a really engaging narrative like. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: How long are these gonna be the episodes? Is 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: it, oh, they range or however much interesting thing, however much interesting content I have to say about a place.
  
  

  But they range from about 25 minutes to, to 45 minutes. Um, so pretty long then. Okay. Yeah. So they take a long time to, for, for an essay, it's pretty long. Right. And, and honestly reading them is a pain in the ass because you have to get everything just right and there's all these, and these like, oh my gosh, it's this whole thing.
  
  

  So it's like, yeah, it's a, it's, it's, it's [01:37:00] less work than you might think because I had a ton of the content written already and just sort of had to edit it. Um, so that was nice. But like, honestly, even just recording it still takes a, a ton of time. And, um, so, uh, I'm, I'm trying to wrap that, uh, up and, um, those are gonna drop starting September 3rd.
  
  

  Uh, but I, I am really excited about that. 'cause I, to sort of tie it back into my other interests is that, so the connection between the scholar, the intellectual thinker and the traveler is of course the anthropologist. Right. And, um, this is, uh, sort of a not so secret obsession of mine. Our anthropologists, especially the sort of old school ones who would go to like.
  
  

  You know, basically the setup is like, I'm gonna pick the people who are most different from me on earth, and I'm gonna go try and make sense of what they're up to, and I'm gonna go to some remote island or, or this or that, and live in the jungle for a year. Right? So that sort of pre, [01:38:00] let's say 1970s anthropology, um, I love those.
  
  

  Um, and, uh, and so, so yeah, there's, there's two different things here. One is that in the long term I have this, I, I would really love to do this is, um, to combine the sort of exposition of ideas that people like you and I are interested in as, you know, science writers or whatever you wanna call it. And, uh, these travel logs and do it in a fresh way.
  
  

  It's sort of like, you know, if you think back to 1999, 2000 when Malcolm Gladwell came out with the tipping point, and he had this really novel way of interlacing academic findings with narratives, um, and it turned out to be a really, really good formula because it's the one that pretty much everyone copies nowadays.
  
  

  Um, but, uh, and you know, I, he, Malcolm Gladwell is a narrative genius, and I'm [01:39:00] certainly not that, but in, in, in the same way of, of trying to come up with a new way of interlacing, um, experience with ideas, which I think is, is this really. Um, you know, high level of, uh, ability to encapsulate something about the world is if you can capture both the theoretical, um, sort of abstract things about it as well as the intimacy of, of what it's like to experience it.
  
  

  That's sort of this, this big goal of, of, to me what I love about writing and, and ideas and all sort of stuff, and wanna capture my own work. And so in, in the long term, I would love to have these two, um, you know, strains connect from the, the sort of science, classic science exposition and talking about ideas, uh, to, uh, intersect with these, these travel blocks.
  
  

  So that's one strain about the second thing, which is, I think what we were gonna talk about next was, um, the, uh, work that I've been doing in psychology is based around this idea of [01:40:00] the intuitive anthropologist. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Right. Can I ask one quick question before that? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Okay. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Um, have you actually done anthropological field work or something?
  
  

  Cody Kommers: No, I haven't done any anthropological field 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: work. Uh, is that something you'd, I mean, it sounds like you're already interested in it and 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: as 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: a, I dunno, like a internship or something. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Oh God. So here's, here's the whole thing. This, this, oh my God, I have, I, uh, the, there's, there's, I have way too many opinions on this sort of thing, but anthropology in, so here's, here's a question worth asking.
  
  

  If you're so obsessed with anthropology, why don't you go get your degree in anthropology instead of psychology? Uh, and I think that's, uh. A really valid question. And the answer to it is that anthropology is a field. It's kind of fucked up. Um, and that's coming from someone whose, you know, field is in the midst of replication, crisis, generalization, generalized stability crisis, and every other potential crisis that one could conceivably have in psychology.
  
  

  Um, but just at the end of the day, um, [01:41:00] psychology still purports to be a science. And I think that that's a good thing. And anthropology has gotten itself really stuck in the mud of the really difficult things about humanities, right? And so here, the, the answer to, to the question of why I don't wanna do anthropology is also to the answer to the question of why that pre 1970s anthropology doesn't really exist anymore.
  
  

  So why can't, um, urban white guys go off to, you know, uh, remote tribes of brown skinned people and come back and, and talk about it? And the answer to that question, one broad stroke of it, is that you, you have to start to ask, so what, what does it mean to successfully do that sort of thing, uh, in, in the way that it's purported to, to do, to what level is that project even possible?
  
  

  Um, and that turns out to be a really, really difficult question to ask to answer. And, um, the way [01:42:00]anthropology has elected to answer it, for the most part as a field cultural anthropology at least, is through. You know, basically the, the sort of schemas of the, the humanities and um, uh, you know, sort of critical theory and all of these sort of, uh, tricky things, which, whether or not they are, um, you know, sort of useful setting aside the question of, of whether or not, you know, whatever one thinks of them more generally.
  
  

  They make it really, really difficult to answer this question because it turns out that it's really difficult to say in what way an outsider can go into somewhere and say, these are what these people are doing. And, uh, there's all sorts of problematic things about it. Like it's really a vestige of colonialism and that sort of stuff.
  
  

  And so, look, anthropology as it's practiced in anthropology departments, I don't wanna do that. Um, so that's one reason. The second reason, which I'll keep shorter, is, um, that to me, the, one of the things that I'm always trying to [01:43:00] do, uh, is be somewhere that I don't belong, right? So I wanna be somewhere where the way that I think about something is different from the way that people typically think about something.
  
  

  So, um, to me there is power in saying, look, psychology, cognitive science, that's my field of training. That's where I, those are the people that I, you know, most am, am a part of, but I'm gonna go and try and get this completely separate. Um, understanding of the way this other field thinks and take some of their ideas and bring 'em back here, and have that be at odds with the sort of mainstream thinking.
  
  

  So that, that's basically 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: what anthropologists does, right? You go for a different field and bring stuff back to your 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: idea. That's, that's really the answer to the questions is the meta anthropology going on here. Um, which is that every, you know, experience is an opportunity to be an anthropologist and to, um, to sort of put yourself in a position that is not the one that would be most comfortable for you.
  
  

  [01:44:00] And to use that as, um, a lens of, uh, you know, understanding that, and that that's in a much more, of course, informal way than what the formal anthropologist who has a title of Professor of Anthropology does in, you know, in in her capacity as a, as an academic. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Mm-hmm. Okay. So then I think that is the link then to the Preprint.
  
  

  Um, so I think this is one reason I wanted to talk about this, because it seemed to me that, so you, I heard you talk about it in the podcast with Mark Ranta, um, and there were some things that I thought were, I didn't agree with you, so I thought that could be kind of interesting. I, I didn't write them down.
  
  

  I don't have a list. But if you could, um, I think if you just explain kind of what you want to do, uh, in your preprint, then I think we can have an interesting conversation about that. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: What is the 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: topic 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: the. The title of the Preprint is the Intuitive Anthropologist. Why [01:45:00] Intuitive Psychology falls Short for understanding Those who are different.
  
  

  And the basic idea is that, so for a long time now in psychology, going back to I think 1977 with Lee Ross, you have this notion of the intuitive psychologist. And this says that when one human being is trying to understand the mind of another human being, essentially what they're doing is what, um, professional psychologists do formally in an informal way, right?
  
  

  So they're, they're trying to approximate what whatever it is that, um, professional psychologists are doing. And then this is how they're gaining their insight into, uh, the way other humans behave. And so from this spring, uh, all of the sort of touchstones of this sort of social psychology like theory of mind and mentalizing and, uh, empathy, cognitive empathy, emotional [01:46:00] empathy, whatever your favorite label for this general phenomenon is.
  
  

  And, um, the sort of observation that I wanna make in that paper at a very high level is that, okay, so you have intuitive psychology. That's a really useful concept. However, um, psychology is only one of the fields, which is, um. Sort of invested in the enterprise, understanding human behavior. It also happens to be the one that we psychologists are involved in.
  
  

  And so isn't it, doesn't it seem likely that maybe there's a little bit of chauvinism going on here saying, oh, you know what we do Well, that's what everyone else is doing, and just sort of leaving it at that. Um, and of course there's other, um, kinds of intuitive theories as they're called in the field.
  
  

  So you have intuitive physics, you have intuitive biology, you know, whatever, these sort of folk theories about how the world works. But, um, there's not as much work done on, you know, sort of bringing in something, [01:47:00] uh, like the perspectives from the other social sciences, so like sociology or anthropology.
  
  

  And, um, the reason one, uh, might think that we're leaving something on the table here looking at what anthropology, sociology does, is that, so if you think about the setup of anthropology, like we were talking about, is that, so you have one person, the anthropologist, and you have another person, um, who is, you know, whatever, uh, the, the, the person who's to be studied.
  
  

  And, uh, the anthropologist tries to find, select that other person such that they are as different from them as possible. And then go in there and be like, how do I, what do I do to try and this person's so different than me, how do I try and, um, make sense of that? Right? And, um, if you, if you look at anthropology as difficult as, as, as we talked about, as difficult as that problem is.
  
  

  That is a very different kind of problem than what psychology is suited to to do. So what psychology has, is suited to do and what it's always held [01:48:00] as a sort of philosophical point is, um, psychology is looking for what's common between everyone. It's saying, look, what is the, what is the invariant mind that we all share?
  
  

  How do neurons work? 'cause presumably that's the same way among everyone. How do the faculties of long-term and short-term memory work, presumably that's the same among everyone. And you wanna build out this sort of core deal of cognition that like you could go and find those things on every person on the planet.
  
  

  Uh, and so there's this really deep philosophical difference, uh, where psychology is looking for things that are common between people and anthropology is looking for things that are different between people. And, um, I think when we, uh, rely almost exclusively on, uh, the notion of intuitive psychology, we are, uh, find, we're basically going to find the same issues in our understanding of the way other people understand each other.
  
  

  We're going to, um, understand a lot about [01:49:00] how they understand. What's common between the minds, everyone else. So for instance, if I go look at the water bottle on my desk, um, then you, uh, think, uh, oh, well he's looking at something off the thing. I wonder what, you know, right? So you, everyone looks at things and you can look at people's eyes.
  
  

  And so a lot of theory of mind work is like, oh, if this person looks over here, what do they know about the world? Um, that's the like Sally Ann task where you have boxes and dolls and they're switching and who knows what and where and and, and all that sort of stuff. And, um, the point of anthropology is, um, uh, like I said, to look at differences.
  
  

  And, uh, it turns out that the methodology for doing this is very different than, um, so 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: can I interrupt you on, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: of course, the 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: point of anthropology there of, so what you said two slight different. You said the point of anthropology slightly differently there, if I remember correctly, once you said is anthropologists try to, uh, find [01:50:00] differences between people.
  
  

  Something like that. Uh, I can't, okay. I can't remember exactly how you phrased it. Anyway. My, my question is kind of, I always, I dunno much about anthropology. Um, so this might be a, just a misunderstanding on my part, but it always seemed to me that they were trying to find people who were different for them to find the commonalities.
  
  

  Is, is that not what they're trying to do? Like they say, okay, we're going to go through, uh, some tribe in the Amazons who, you know, share none of the structures we have, and then we we're going to see and like, how are they similar to us to find the universal features in humans? But 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: yeah, so that's a really good question.
  
  

  Was my assumption. That's a really good question. And um, you know, the answer to some extent is yeah, they are trying to do both. Um, and, um, I think the, the sort of easiest dichotomy is this, is that theory tends to focus on things that are invariant among people. So for example, a famous, um, uh, anthropological theory would be structuralism [01:51:00] or functionalism.
  
  

  Structuralism being that all cultures are made outta the same building blocks and you just rearrange, you know, those building blocks in different ways. And functionalism being that every, you know, sort of ritual or thing that takes place in a culture, uh, is meant to serve some sort of function. Another, it accomplishes some sort of goal.
  
  

  Um, and so, you know, you would look at that and you'd say, okay, well yeah, all if you're a functionalist, then all cultural happenings serve some sort of, um, you know, function and it's your job to. Find out what they're, but that would be something that, that is the same amongst everyone. Uh, but then an example contrary to that is that the sort of primary deliverables, an anthropologist, uh, you know, sort of comes up with their, their academic papers are called ethnographies.
  
  

  And this is a description of, um, so I went there and always starts off with you're, um, describing their kin relations. So in the West we have, you know, fathers, uh, [01:52:00] grandfathers, mothers, grandmothers, sons, daughters, uncles, uh, uh, and then so you, but in some cultures, everyone who is ex counts as your uncle or there's some, you know, second cousin twice removed is a special thing.
  
  

  So they start off. And so that's specific to that culture. So ethnographies tend to be about the specific things that are, these are the peculiar things this person does. Of course, that links back to sort of the problematic of anthropology, which is that you're exoticizing of brown people, which is not a great look for white people, um, in the, but 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: are you, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: well, so this is why anthropologists, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: it was more like you just, I mean, you like to put it the other way around.
  
  

  If they were to come to Western Europe and find the differences, I mean, that would be the same thing. Right? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I'm glad you asked that question. And the reason and the answer to that question is, um, that this is why anthropologists don't do very much interesting stuff, in my opinion, is because this dialogue.
  
  

  [01:53:00] Uh, they've been stuck in this dialogue for a very long time. It's like, but is that a problem? Okay, well, yeah, but here's, and like, so there's this, there's a lot of, there's a lot of that, which makes it very hard to proceed on it. Anyway, that's just my sort of opinion. Um, so I, I wanna set, set that question aside because I think if we dig into that Yeah.
  
  

  It's a separate que Okay. It is, it's a really, let's just suffice to say it's a really tricky issue. It's a really tricky issue. Um, and, uh, it's not at all easy to disentangle and, um, uh, there, you know, there's, there's a lot to consider there. Um, but anyway, um, so, so yeah, we were talking about, uh, you know, sort of, okay, so anthropologists, let, let, let's be honest here.
  
  

  I am making just egregious simplifications about psychology, intuitive psychology, anthropology, intuitive anthropology. So there's always gonna be some question in the form of like, oh, but, you know, if you were to get more specific, so yeah, sure, those are all fair play and you should ask [01:54:00] them, but I am making dramatic oversimplifications.
  
  

  Um, but I think they give us a concept, a useful conceptual starting point. And so the, so the point that I wanna make is if. Okay, so let's, let's take this idea seriously that we should be looking at via notion of intuitive anthropology in the same way that we look at the notion of intuitive psychology.
  
  

  What, what would we, what would we start to look at? And so it turns out, in my reading of anthropology as a non anthropologist, is that, um, when you really get serious about looking at the methods of anthropological field work, which were developed, um, mainly in 1922 in, um, a, a text by, uh, an anthropologist named Brono Malky, uh, Argonauts of the Western Pacific.
  
  

  And he basically invented modern anthropological field work. And there's not that many methodological updates that have been done since then. 'cause at the end of the day, um, when you go somewhere and try and understand [01:55:00] someone else, there isn't an algorithm or an experimental protocol that's going to get you from a place of not knowing anything to knowing a, you know, critical mass of stuff.
  
  

  Um, it's a much more freeform. Uh, problem. And so the question of whether or not you do a decent ethnography or are successful in your anthropological, um, uh, investigations is not so much about some sort of fancy, fancy mental gymnastics about empathically, putting yourself into that other person's shoes.
  
  

  Um, it's about are you putting in the effort to do the hard work of spending every second you can with these people trying to learn their language, trying to be with them in every possible situation, trying to experience some of the things that they experience, trying to ask them about, um, what you're missing when you're not experiencing those things.
  
  

  The ma the basic idea of malofsky's, uh, methodology is called participant observation. [01:56:00] You participate and you observe. Um, and the whole point being that it's not about the mental gymnastics, which is what theory of mind is. It's some algorithm for saying how do you get into the mind of another person?
  
  

  How do you successfully negotiate all that sort of stuff. But it's actually about motivation. Are you willing to get your ass into the field, into a tent under the mosquito net and sit there for a year until you can speak the language and, uh, understand this stuff? And, uh, the point is, is that when you look at divisions in the world today, like between Repub Republicans and Democrats in the us, um, there's a complete lack of that connection of one camp willing to truly engage in that, um, in that way and say, look, I'm gonna do the hard work of existing with these people who I don't get at all.
  
  

  I think they're ridiculous. I think they're totally off their rocker. Um, and I'm gonna go, you know, figure out what they're, what they're thinking about and how they really [01:57:00] live and where these ideas are coming from. Um, and so that's sort of the full circle thing is that I think, um, for all its faults, anthropology shows us that it's a question, not of, you know, sort of an intellectual edge, but it's whoever goes out there and spends the time with them.
  
  

  And when we look at, um, the inability of people to make sense of minds outside of their own social group today, to the extent to which you think that's happening, um, it's, it's for that same, same, same, same sort of lack. Does that make sense? 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Uh, yeah. I'm just not entirely sure. So what are you proposing then for, for psychologists to do?
  
  

  Or is that not part of the paper? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: What 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: I say to me, like, you had like a suggestion, like, uh, you know, like, we're lacking this thing that they're doing, or we should do this. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: So one thing, one thing is that, um. I mean in, in sort of just, uh, [01:58:00] conceptual strokes, we need to distinguish between when you're doing, um, some version of intuitive psychology for an ingroup versus outgroup member.
  
  

  So most, um, theory of mind studies don't look at this sort of thing. Um, because, you know, if you're, if you've got something like, like the majority of theory of mind tasks are about this really minimal version of theory of mind, where it's like you either understand that this other agent has mental states and those mental states are different from yours, or they, or, or you don't get that right.
  
  

  And so it's used as a sort of diagnostic tool for aut autism spectrum. Uh, deals are for infants and, uh, a lot of theory of mind stuff, uh, is sort of, uh, co-opted from that and then used unhealthy adults and on all this sort of stuff. And so, uh, we need more robust theory of mind paradigms, uh, to, to capture those gradations of things.
  
  

  And because these are, these are beliefs about, these are worldview beliefs. These aren't beliefs [01:59:00]about, oh, is the doll in box A or box B? These are, uh, much more sophisticated beliefs that are legitimately harder to capture in, in experimental paradigms. Um, but, uh, because we focused in on the experimental paradigms and not as much the real world situations, we've missed this key part of what's happening.
  
  

  Um, so dimensionality is one thing. So, uh, all, pretty much all theory of mind paradigms are one dimensional, either the mental state is true or false, or a or B or whatever it is. And, um, uh, crucial mental states that are gonna be different between different members of different social groups are multi-dimensional.
  
  

  Uh, and so they'll, you know, whatever, whatever you're you're talking about, they're just gonna be more, basically more complicated. But having some sort of experimental paradigm where there's, there's more happening like that. Um, but then my favorite concept that I wanna bring in from anthropology two [02:00:00]psychology is this concept of something called thick description by the anthropologist Clifford Geertz.
  
  

  And, um, so this is actually a super famous concept. So if you compare it to so prospect theory, potentially the most famous theory in sort of, you know, uh, behavioral economics or, you know, this decision psychology, whatever you wanna call it, it has like 60,000 citations. Um, my numbers might be slightly outta date, but it's, you know, 60, 70, lot of lot of citations, Nobel Prize winning.
  
  

  Thick description by Clifford Geertz that the, the book that it's from has a hundred thousand, uh, citations. Uh, it is strictly speaking, uh, from that measurement, uh, a more influential theory, yet you'll never hear it once in a psychology, uh, um, department. It's basically a theory about what it means to understand, so the people, and it has to do with, uh, you know, sort of getting into, [02:01:00] um, you know, it's, it's, it's this whole, it's this whole thing and we, we can talk about it if you want, but basically bringing that theory into the psychological parlance would be something I'd like to do.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, that was, that was one part that really su that, that kind of caught my attention in your conversation with Mark Vet is that I'd never heard of the guy. And, um, although funnily enough, then two days later, I, I'm reading, uh, one of the books I'm reading is, it's called The Utopia of Rules by, um, David Grabber.
  
  

  Um, he wrote a book called Bullshit Jobs, which is fairly famous a few years ago. Anyway, he, uh, I'd never heard of that name. And then of course, two days after hearing you talk. About, uh, Clifford GI Smith. Um, Mya, I read that name in one of his books. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Now that you know that name, you're gonna see it lots of places because it's really hard to touch any sort of anthropological work.
  
  

  And, you know, um, David Grabber is an anthropologist without touching on gits. Um, or like, you know, the [02:02:00] conversation. I think my most recent cognitive resolution podcast is with Daniel Everett, um, who's, uh, a really awesome, uh, anthropological, linguist, amazing, amazing guy. Like literally, oh my God. Like literally the closest thing we have to Indiana Jones.
  
  

  Um, but his, I mean, the epigraph to his book is a Clifford k Clifford GI quote. Um, so it's this re and Clifford Git was like the greatest academic writer of all time. Um, so he's, he's very much my hero. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: So you, so you'd recommend that book? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I'd recommend The Interpretation of Cultures, which is the, um, his most famous collection of essays.
  
  

  The first one there, lays out his theory of thick description. You know, it's, it's, I I don't think there's a guarantee that you're going to, like anyone could pick it up and be like, oh, wow, this has answered all the questions. I don't know. I don't know what your average neuropsychologist, you know, whatever would, would make of [02:03:00] it.
  
  

  Um, uh, but uh, yeah, if you dig into it, there's a lot there. And, um, then the last essay in that collection, um, notes on the Balinese Cock fight. Oh my God. Now that's something. Oh, that is, oh, that's so good. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Okay. I have to find that. But could you then briefly outline thick description on what, like what, what are we lacking that can at least partially be solved with that, uh, process or what, whatever it is.
  
  

  Yeah, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: so I think to me, thick description is most easily illustrated by starting with, uh, what would be a thin description. So a, a thin description of anything, of a culture, of a person, of a place of this, or that would be basically a single dimensional data point, right? So if you said, I'm going to describe the United States of America, and then you showed me a, a graph [02:04:00] that was, you know, uh, uh, um, like political views as a function of population density, that would be an interesting graph.
  
  

  'cause you would see, uh, oh, well, you know, these liberal, you know, ideologies tend to, you know, be in high population density areas. Wow. Okay. That's, that's, that's interesting. Um, that, so there's lots to unpack there. But if you just left it that and said, that's the United States, that's a thin description.
  
  

  And so what a thick description seeks to do is say, well, how do you describe as much of it as possible? How do you really get into, um, uh, you know, as close to describing the multidimensional reality as possible? Um, and so that's why it's hard to give a, a positive definition of it is because it encompasses potentially everything, but the, the, the sort of point of it is that you have, um, uh, you have to have an experiential component of like, it can't [02:05:00] just be here are all the empirical facts about it.
  
  

  Um, because then you are missing out on some key aspect of it, which is some semblance of what it's actually like to, to be there or to, to experience it and send some, some, some, some kind of thing. So that's, that kind of ties back to what I was saying in, you know, my goal as a writer and what I love is in writing is when someone can capture both the theoretical, here's how to think about something abstractly as well as here is the experience of what it was like to be there.
  
  

  Um, and so thick description in its sort of apotheosis is when you can capture both a theory about what is transpiring as well as the pheno phenomenological experience of what it's like to be there while it's transpiring. So it's tough to wrap your mind around, explain though 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: why this isn't adopted or even known in psychotic neuroscience.
  
  

  Right. Because that's by definition objective, right? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. So it's, [02:06:00] it's tough to, um, it's tough to incorporate. I mean, it's, it's definitely not an easy slot in like, oh, you know, you have your besian prior. Well, if you just take out the Sian prior and put in thick description, then you're good to go. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Easy.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah. So you are, so you are proposing just like, this is something we're missing and we should be paying more attention to rather than, and here's how we do it. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. Um, I didn't wanna have to wait, uh, to figure out exactly how we should do it before getting the idea out there. Um, so I think, I think, you know, what I've described is worth saying personally.
  
  

  Everyone can obviously make their own judgment about that, but I, I think those things are, are worth pointing out and I think it's gonna be a long project of reorienting it. Um, and so I would certainly like to contribute to that effort. Um, but I think the delta between, um, sort of identifying this project and saying, oh look, I found the theory of mind paradigm that describes every discrepancy [02:07:00] that I have, uh, pointed out.
  
  

  Uh, yeah, I've still got a few years left in the PhD, so that's what I'm gonna spend that time working on, you know? 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Okay. That, that was actually something I wanted to ask. Is that something, because, is that something that's actually part of your main PhD work, or is that. Something kind of in addition to, because it wasn't quite clear to me whether, I mean, you know, usually in your PhD work you have like an experiment you do with your supervisor or something, right?
  
  

  Um, whilst this is more like a perspective thing, so I was curious, is that something you're actually working? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: This actually works out, like working nicely for my PhD stuff. 'cause one of my advisors, the one that I've been working with primarily for the last year, his name is Matthew Apps. He just moved from Oxford to Birmingham.
  
  

  Um, he works on motivation basically. And he is a phenomenal experimentalist, one of the best experimentalists I've ever, um, uh, met. And so I am currently working on, um, intergroup versions of his, uh, previous motivation work. So, [02:08:00] uh, the general question he looks at is, so, okay, we all know that people are motivated to earn rewards for themselves.
  
  

  What about if you have a setup where you can earn rewards for another person and put an effort to do that? Um, how do people negotiate those sort of pro-social effort situations? Really interesting question. Hasn't yet looked at it. And well, what if that person is an in-group member versus an Outgroup member?
  
  

  That's what I'm currently working on. And then you can see that there's sort of a bridge from that to like, okay, I can earn rewards for that Outgroup member versus I can do the effort to understand that thing. So that's, that's the first extension is intergroup. The second extension will be, um, you know, uh, whatever, uh, you know, how, how do you generalize that to.
  
  

  Perspective taking intuitive psychology, theory of mind, cognitive empathy, et cetera. And that's my second PhD supervisor, Jeff Bur currently Oxford. Um, and I'm gonna be working with him more over the next couple years. And, um, so that's, [02:09:00] that's where hopefully that stuff's gonna start to develop. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Okay. Yeah, it sounds like something that's, I mean, in a sense it sounds like you are trying to, I mean, it's, it's kind of a paradigm shift, right?
  
  

  In a way to say, okay, we have like this way of doing it, but we really need to like, change gears or add something with, I mean, it sounds like this is, I mean, that's not, that's not a trivial problem to be working on. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Um, I mean, I will certainly attempt to shift the paradigm whether or not the paradigm gets shifted is up to everyone else.
  
  

  Um, but yeah, this seems to me like the, like a thing that if I, if you asked me, so Cody, what do you think most psychologists are wrong about? Or what do they insufficiently understand in general or as a field or what's, what do you sort of, what's the conventional wisdom that is most wrong or most incomplete?
  
  

  That's the answer that I give. So in that [02:10:00] sense, yeah. The topic that I've selected to work on and live or die by in my academic career is one that I think, um. Uh, answers that question, but like we've talked about, um, the sort of issue is like, okay, so you have thick description, that's great. I'm glad it works for, you know, sociologists and David Grabber and everyone, uh, but can you successfully incorporate that into, um, you know, the notions that we have in psychology and cognitive science?
  
  

  I don't know. I'm gonna give it a shot and I'll let you know, uh, in a little while, uh, whether or not anyone buys that. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: That sounds great. Yeah, I'll definitely check out your preprint for more detail then. Yeah. Yeah. It's interesting. Like, I, I, I sometimes wonder like whether, you know, like thinking about my own PhD work, like I feel like that would be so cool to have something like this is something that people are lacking and I'm trying to like, I feel like I'm still like looking for a problem in that sense, like something where I feel like this is something that really needs [02:11:00] to be addressed.
  
  

  Um, so in some sense I'm, I'm quite envious of you having a, uh, a clear direction in that sense. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Yeah. So how do you feel like you begin to think about that? Or what do you Yeah, I mean, yeah. How does that, how does that play out for you? Yeah, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: I don't know. I mean, it's, I mean, so I, I mean I had, I'm working a lot on co cooperation.
  
  

  Um, and so in incorporating game theory and these kind of things, and, uh, so I had done a bit before starting my PhD on this, but. Uh, not that much. Uh, so I pretty much came to this completely new and I guess like, I'm still just trying to figure out the field in a sense. I mean, in a sense it's also several fields because you have evolution, biologists doing it, economists, psychologists, and all sorts of people working on this.
  
  

  Um, I don't know, right now it's a kind of like, I guess finding smaller problems and thinking [02:12:00] like, Hey, shouldn't that be something? And then trying to work on that. Um, yeah, I should say it's just like the kind of thing that I keep having with back on mind. Like the, uh, I'd like to have like a kind of grander, not, not grand in that sense, but like, just bigger, um, a big, yeah, a bigger problem than I'm working in that sense.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: mean, rather than having like an existing framework and like adding to it a bit, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: uh, you know, I guess far be it for me to, to, um, you know, suggest what one should do for one's PhD since I have not successfully completed my PhD yet. But, um, certainly my, my strategy on that is to steal ideas from other fields, right?
  
  

  The outsider perspective, like we were, we were talking on, um, because I mean, cooperation, that's like the best that is, that's like the single biggest. Like social phenomenon in the history of social phenomenon, and everyone knows it [02:13:00] and um, uh, economists know it, uh, sociologists know it, uh, psychologists know it, evolutionary biologists know it.
  
  

  Um, and so to me the question would be who, you know, uh, who, who has looked this, but the core group of people we all know evolutionary biology and economics and, you know, game theory and this and that. Those, those everyone, all of those have have studied it, who has a perspective on it that, um, is not yet part of that, you know, sort of literature.
  
  

  Um, that to me is where those quote paradigm shifting ideas come from. Right? And if you study the history of, um, ideas in whatever field you like, um, I'm particular to anthropology and cognitive science. Um, but that is where they always come from is someone who is not inundated with the sort of traditional theories of the field, comes along and says, well, here's a [02:14:00] totally different thing that these other people came up with.
  
  

  And, um, and, and puts that in there. So that's, in my interpretation of Kian paradigm shifts, that would be, um, the sort of main, main way they come about. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah. I, in principle, I agree. I wonder with cooperation, because it's so. I want, I mean there, there obviously are things that people are looking at, but because, you know, there's also anthropologists, sociologists, computer scientists, like all these people, just pure mathematicians, whatever, working on this or, well, I guess it's more like applied mathematics, but I wonder whether maybe, I mean, maybe this is just a big problem, trying to find one framework to fill it all in.
  
  

  Um, in some sense, I guess game theory is kind of the connecting tissue because it provides one mathematical framework into which you can, uh, put all these, like from whatever angle you want to do it. Um, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: wait, so Okay. One, 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: yeah. I mean, yeah. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: One thing I wanna flag there is that the other problem with cooperation is it's something [02:15:00] we understand decently well in my understanding of it.
  
  

  Um, and there's like, part of the thing that sometimes you have to look for is you need to look for places where people are really confused, right? And social psychology is a great place to look for that. 'cause there's so many places where people have no fucking idea what's going on, even though they've been looking at it forever.
  
  

  And Theory of Vines broadly construed this whole intuitive, I mean, it's, it's, it's a mess in a lot of ways. There's a lot of great work out there, don't get me wrong. I, I don't mean to denigrate any one single person, but in terms of, um, you know, a field that knows what's it, what it's about, and the best way to look at it.
  
  

  And, and, and also, oh, no way. Not even close, right? So the problem. The other problem with cooperation might be that we understand it pretty well and we have pretty good models. So this, this actually happened to me, which was that before I was interested in this sort of stuff, I was really interested in Ian models and reinforcement learning models, and did, um, a lab manager stint with, uh, Sam Gershman, who [02:16:00] did, you know, just like, you know these things.
  
  

  He does everything. Yeah, he, he does everything. Um, and, uh, you know, what I should have done from a career perspective is some continuation of Sam's work. Um, because I would've, uh, you know, that would've, uh, that would've been a good move. However, I was like, you know what? I don't wanna do this anymore. I wanna do something different.
  
  

  And it took me a while to figure out why I was feeling like that, uh, because I was so enamored of these computational models when I, for, for the first couple years after I found them. And the problem that I have with them is that they're too good to me. They do too good of a job of describing what it is they're trying to describe.
  
  

  And so my, and you know, I have lots of friends who are working on this, so I don't, I don't, I, I don't mean to, you know, belittle their contributions, but for me, I look at that and it's like, if you, if you work on, you know, the Beijing line of, of work. [02:17:00] Uh, it's on track, it's going really well and you're going to come up with some good papers.
  
  

  Um, uh, but the probability of a game changer of a paradigm shifter very low. Um, 'cause they work really well for what they're trying to do, and they're super useful and they're one of the best things that psychology has come up with. And so it's like, you know what, uh, or at least in retrospect I can, I, this is my sort of post-talk theory about why I switched outta that is it's like, well, you know, I have to find something that's screwed up if I'm gonna find a novel way of, um, of contributing to it in this maybe, you know, quote bigger sort of way.
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, no, I, I definitely agree with that. That's something I've also had to think about because I mean, so I mean, in part this was just because I didn't get positions, but I have applied for some things where that was really something I was wondering, like, should I go into that field? One is, for [02:18:00] example, the whole grid cell stuff was, especially now, there's a lot of stuff about applying the spatial navigation literature to general cognition and, um, it's super interesting and, uh, I love reading about it.
  
  

  And, you know, had I been given the position, I probably would be doing that now. But I do wonder all the time, like, man, like exactly what you said, like that. We say like, that train is going down the, its railroads, it's going pretty fast. It's doing really well. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Oh, a hundred percent I'll 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: needed, it doesn't need me.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Like, I think part of the question is, you know, if I were there, would I be able to add something that wouldn't otherwise happen? 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Exactly. Yeah. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: And the answer for, for good sounds, I don't know, man, I, for, for patient cognition, I'm not sure that I could bring something to the table that I, I could do something and it'd be cool, but I, uh, you know, I don't know that I would be able to come up with something that is, is truly a unique, an idiosyncratic contribution to what the [02:19:00] train's already going on, you know?
  
  

  So I think that's totally a thing in science, and it's something we don't talk about as much. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah. I guess the kind of finding your own path is probably the hardest way, a hardest thing in a way. Well, I guess I, or not, I guess it really depends. I mean, I remember like EO Wilson, uh, in, I think it's maybe in this book.
  
  

  It has like a book, what's it called? Like advice to young investigators? Something like that. Or letters to a, yeah. I, I think it's in that one way he describes something like, he just liked ants and did it. And then like he was one of the top five researchers of the world coffee into his PhD because just no one was looking into ants and that they're super interesting.
  
  

  I think maybe sometimes you just fall into that kind of thing. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: That goes back to the market size question that we were talking about recently, or, uh, at the beginning, um, several hours ago, was that, um, you know, if you're starting a podcast, do you tackle the largest thing? You start the Happiness podcasts, or do you do a niche thing and then just, you know, this is what I wanna do and I'm gonna do the niche thing and you know, if it grows into something big, great if it just [02:20:00] stays with the niche thing, that's fine as well.
  
  

  Um, so I feel like, um, that's a, that's a pretty generalizable, that's something you can take to the bank, um, is, are the dynamics of that 'cause that's true for business, it's true for, uh, marketing, any creative endeavor. And, uh, science definitely falls somewhere between one of those two categories, somewhere between a business and a creative, uh, work.
  
  

  It definitely has a lot of commonality with both those things. And so, um, yeah, picking, picking something that no one else is working on, I think is a pretty bankable strategy. Uh. For sure. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: I guess the only problem is you can't ask for advice for that in a way, because like, I think a natural thing when you dunno what to do is to look for what other people are doing.
  
  

  But that's kind of exactly what you almost shouldn't be doing in a way. Because if you're looking for what other people are doing, you are, you are in that mindset in a way, right? 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I mean, look, let's, let's be honest about this. What I want to do is what we're talking about. Um, but that's not what everyone wants to do, should be [02:21:00] doing.
  
  

  Uh, it's not what it behooves the field for everyone to try and do. And so I think there is still a lot of merit for people who, um, are not of the same mind about what we're describing philosophically, and they're better suited to a different way of thinking about things. And science is gonna progress really well, not because people like me come and be like, what if we think about everything differently?
  
  

  Um, but because they're making actual progress on like, so what's the actual contribution of this paper? Well, I have a new idea that's me, right? Like that's, I'm, I'm a, you know, they're actually doing the real, the real stuff. Um, so that's, that's hugely important. And, um, so I think everyone, uh, I think to me, everyone should have that conceptual model available and have come to Jesus talk about where they fit on it, where they wanna fit on it, and where they're best suited to fit on it.
  
  

  Uh, and I think, uh, the whole spectrum is legitimate. Uh, I know what I wanna do with it. Um, but certainly that's not the case. Not gonna be the case for everyone, you know? 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah, I definitely agree. [02:22:00] Yeah. I mean also like, you need almost, I feel like. Um, it's not like that I want, per se, to be, to be something, doing something different or anything like that, but I do kind of like doing something that's a bit different.
  
  

  And for that to exist, you need people who are going down the, uh, the, the more, how should we say who are, who are doing stuff that's more already accepted and where it's clearer where it's going. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: I do think it is necessarily lonely though, like you were saying, oh, well, it's not, you know, necessarily Who do you, who do you talk to about that sort of thing?
  
  

  Who do you, who, who do you talk to about like, well I have, you know, the cognitive science of, uh, you know, perspective taking, and then I have thick description. How do I marry the two? Who's the person that I, that I like, send an email? Who do I call up? Um, and talk. I mean, there isn't, I mean, who do? I don't know.
  
  

  Uh, and so yeah, it is, it is lonely. Whereas like if I continue with the, it seems 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: like you're calling up Mark Gran. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Well, so that's, that's, yeah. That, that's been the most [02:23:00] successful call that I've made some more. And I'm honestly not gonna complain about that. Uh, and that I, that's why I was happy when that happened.
  
  

  'cause it's like this, it's a rare thing, um, to get someone who. Uh, you know, is, you know, already on a similar page with that. And to have it be that guy, I mean, anyway, so, but the, but the, the point is that, you know, I, so I was working on Beijing models of cognition. I mean, I could call up all my old mates from, from Boston and we'd, we'd, you know, have a chat about it.
  
  

  Uh, so it's, it's lonelier to do the, the thing. And, you know, that's a, that's a thing that, that works for me. Um, you know, a lot of my, uh, endeavors are lonely endeavors, writing for the most part's a lonely endeavor. Um, my podcast, it's nice to talk to people, but most of the work is done with me on my own.
  
  

  Um, most of my science projects so far have been, uh, all myself. So that's something that I'm working on is, is, is finding more collaborative, uh, [02:24:00] opportunities because I think I could benefit from a couple of them. But at the end of the day, my, my natural state is a little bit more solitary, I think. And, um, uh, you know, I'm ready to, and also the traveling thing.
  
  

  You'll hear in my, in my podcast, all of the, the majority of that that travel stuff is, is solitary travel. And that, to me is the most kind, the most meaningful, at least for, for the goals of, of, of doing something like a podcast. Um, and so, yeah, these solitary endeavors, 'cause look, at the end of the day for, for ideas, the moment you are a part of a group, that group is influencing the way you think about things.
  
  

  And to me, in my reading of the way the world works, if you want to really get at some truly unique ideas, it takes a lot of time spent alone and you have to forfeit, um, some of the group, uh, dynamics. And that sucks for a lot of reasons. It, um, you [02:25:00] know, it's a lot more fun to be a part of a group and it can, it can be, it can be really difficult to be alone on something sometimes.
  
  

  And, um, you know, I, I think that that's the kind of thing that you should look at and, you know, or people generally should look at and, and be like, well, how do I wanna negotiate that? How do I wanna deal with that trade off and be realistic about it? And rather than idealistic about, oh, it sounds great to want to do, you know, whatever.
  
  

  Um, I do think that there's, you know, uh, realistic considerations about, uh, the, the trade-offs involved in, in different strategies for career advancement and, um, you know, developing, uh, a sort of train of thought or something. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah. Uh, to some extent, something that I've noticed is that I think I almost don't really want to be part of a group.
  
  

  I mean, this is just something I've noticed quite a lot. Like I've never really, I feel like, I mean, maybe everyone feels this, I don't know, [02:26:00] but I've never really like been part of one group. I've always the kind of been part of a few groups, even socially, I think, like for example, in school, I think. I was usually like three quarter part of that group, half part of that group.
  
  

  And I think everyone else probably assumed I was part of the other groups. Um, and it's kind of interesting to me to see how in science, this seems to be the same thing, like almost as soon as there is a group and I feel like I'm part of it and I start to move away from it. I want, I mean, yeah, I wonder how much of that is just coincidence or some sort of nonsensical introspection or something, because it is, I 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: think it's totally 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: something I've noticed.
  
  

  Cody Kommers: No, I think, I think you're, you're definitely onto something there. I'm, I'm the same way as you described. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Yeah. Yeah. 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: Anything else you wanna touch on? 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Uh, not sure. There's two, three things I'd like to mention once we're finished. Um, just because these are not things I [02:27:00] wanna make public right now. Um, but there should be a lot shorter.
  
  

  Um, there's are more like individual questions. Other than that I feel like, I feel like we need to end on a slightly more upbeat note rather than us you saying, oh yeah, it's lonely, 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: ah, it's lonely being me. And 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: then just, and then I, and then I just stop 
  
  

  Cody Kommers: podcast. Gosh, you know what's really difficult, it being me.
  
  

  It's, it's just, there's so exactly. Like, you think, you think that life is good, but No, mine is so difficult. Yeah. That's stop. Oh. 
  
  

  Benjamin James Kuper-Smith: Especially, I'm not sure I'll have, like you have at the end, you discuss the podcast. I'm not sure I'll do that, so I might just let you just end it right there.