This is by far one of the worst listens I have tortured myself by getting partway through. Maybe I'll finish it in the future, but this is all around something I wouldn't recommend unless you're interested in finding all the ways someone who claims to be a scientist could be so... concerning? wrong? willfully ignorant?One of the early statistics, though giving a warning about correlations, was distressing. He speaks on how statistically children are less likely to be abducted now than in recent history. This completely ignores the cultural changes in parenting that see care givers more involved and present, making it harder to abduct children. He implies this should be less if a concern. I would argue it's less of a concern because it is a concern.Second, he mentions a statistic about 30% of the prison population being psychopaths, leading him to the interesting conclusion that 70% of psychopaths are among us, outside of prison. Those are different populations. That doesn't make sense. why would you jump to that conclusion about different data sets?Lastly, and this is a litte personal, but he seems wooden and unfamiliar with his own lecturing. He stumbles through his own words, mispronouncing them, stuttering. It's as though a cardboard cutout reached the bare minimum of sentience and slipped under the door of a recording studio. Or, more likely, decided to use the cheapest podcast microphone a 13 year old could get with their lawn mowing money.I understand my degree may only be in Developmental Psychology, but this makes me want to claim to be a Liberal Arts major so I can get some distance.

To me, the text is lacking in quality, substance, and depth.