Right.

And I now have come to the conclusion, and this is kind of the thing that's gonna upset me and upsets my wife more and upsets educators, I think the cognitive aspects of mind, which are disciplined and synthesizing and creativity, are gonna be done so much better by AI that it's gonna become more optional how we actually learn about and think about those things.

On the other hand, the human aspects, respectful how we treat others, and ethics, how do we deal with difficult decisions, personal ones, communal ones, national ones, global ones, climate change, disease, those are things which individuals can make, I think that has to be left to human beings.

We can use AI, but simply as a tool.

So to make it very concrete, I love history, and even if AI could do history 1,000 times better than me, if I wanna do history, fine.

I should do it, and I should be happy with it and not care what AI does.

But if you're not interested in history, and many people whom I love are not, it's like a oral surgery to make them do history for 20 years.

Yeah.

I think that's not as widely known.

Okay, well, I just described teaching understanding and how that was a several-year project.

So was multiple intelligences in the sense that, again, the Ed School, this wasn't Project Zero, but the Ed School as a whole got a very sizable grant for a kind of a weird assignment.

What is known about the nature and realization of human potential? I like to joke that's a West Coast question, not an East Coast question.

It's more California than it is Connecticut.

But my job on that project, which was a five-year well-funded project, was to know what was understood about cognition.

And I used that opportunity in a wonderful research group that I had roughly late 1970s, early 1980s, to visit different countries, consult with different experts, combed through genetics, neurology, archaeology, anthropology, to really take a...

So can you tell us a little bit about the new one? Sure.

And how has your understanding of human ability and human intelligence, how has that developed and changed over these decades? How do you think about it now compared to how you thought about it back then?

Well, let me go back to the arts, because that's very important and very close to my heart.

I've already implied that I was musical.

I was a young pianist.

I perhaps could've been a prodigy, but that wasn't something anybody, including me, wanted.

And then I went on to school and I was a decent student.

But especially when I was finishing my education and had a s- time to travel abroad, I became very interested in the arts.

Uh, how would you connect your creativity work and your intelligence work? You already started to answer that in your, uh, last comments, but could you say a little bit more about that, the creativity-intelligence connection?

Yep

... with not much attention to others.

Um, and so a lot of my own work, this would be a subject for another podcast, is about how to develop in young children the sense not just of I, but of we and of they.

But they not in the sense of they as being enemies, but they as being entities that, uh, we should care about.

And my own research group is now working on a fourth area, I, we, they, and it, because young children now are not only relating to other human beings, they're relating to, um, Alexa and other kinds of AI entities.

And for all we know, for a three- or four-year-old, that's at least as im- as, as significant as another animal or another person.

And in the world of your grandchildren, Cole, um, they'll be working with all kinds of intelligent entities that are not flesh and blood in the way we are, and they're gonna have to have relations with them as well.

Um, so kind of one of my final questions, looking back across more than 40 years since you've, you've published this original book, um, you know, uh, what has surprised you the most about the how, how the theory has been taken up, and what do you wish you'd better understood in 1983?