do you really think bush men in the kalahari would show this? do you think little children would show similar illusions? >> great question, and the data aren't in and, you know, i'll follow the data. i have no reason to think that they wouldn't. i mean, i certainly have no reason to think that bush men in the kalahari live, you know, more inside their own individual minds than anybody else, right? i assume they're also collaborators, they're also team players, and that, i think, is the source of the illusion. so my prediction would be they would, indeed, show the illusion. kids too. it's harolder the show with -- it's harder to show with those populations, and that's important work to be done. >> i would like to ask you about reasoning, and in particular the difference between individual and group reasoning. a recent theory of reasoning by -- [inaudible] suggests that reasoning's something that developed evolutionaryily -- [inaudible] and one of the predictions of that theory is that group or -- reasoning should therefore be somehow more powerfu

i have no reason to think that they wouldn't have no reason to think that bushman and the kalahari live more inside their own individual minds than anybody else. i assume they are also collaborators and team players. that i think is the source of the illusion. my prediction would be they would indeed show the illusions. it is harder to show with those populations. i would like to ask you about reasoning and the difference between individual and group reasoning. the theory of reasoning. is just that it is something that developed as a social rather than individual activity. to find the truth individually. it should therefore be more powerful or more effective. on the other hand there is other planning that when people try to persuade each other. you have this effect. and you end up mobilizing that which actually ends and leave them with a resource in original belief. if group reasoning somehow is more powerful than individual reasoning. it is on my bedside table. i have to answer yes to the final question. it has to be more powerful because that is the nature of reasoning. i think thinki