[MUSIC] So, but it's getting even crazier. Now that we have a good understanding of what more informations, how can we capture more information in the areas text so-called copra actual text, film scripts news, could be also Twitter feed or other text. Now that we know how to do that, Christian is now, if we say that more information becomes motivation relevant, we act upon it higher probability of observing certain events. I explained before higher probability that a movie is better working if it touches on something more information and more conflict, then the question arises from academic. Why is that? And here we can say, is the reason why morality has evolved? There's a reason why humans have a very specific sense of morality. Non-humans is a controversy to what extend foundation of morality are also integrated in non-human mammals actually, but I think we agree on that a very fine sense of morality means particularly indicative for human capacitance. So if all what I just told you is true, if we can build these relationships and if we know that morality and more information that we use in narratives that each other, it must have serve a very specific function in our evolutionary past. So now becomes relevant, how we study that we cannot go back thousands and thousands of years and observe humans and how they exchange narratives and how they were morally framed and was there different wall frame thousands of thousands of years ago. This is just impossible. Those artifacts are lost. So what brain scientists do is they kind of make an assumption. They say, obviously, our biological structures in our heads or brain, they have evolved over time and they have to evolve to serve very specific survival functions. But this idea, you could make the argument that how we process more information biologically, neurally in our brains is a window into our evolutionary past. So if these small information, foundations or domains are motivation relevant, it should be the traits in our biology, how we process. For example, if you want example, if it indeed is true that we evaluate more information along those foundations Freddy mentioned. Fail is authority domain. Purity or sanctity domain. It's a harm domain. It's loyalty domain. If this is true, you would expect that these different domains or foundations, are processed in some way differently in our biology of our brain. So the question is are there dis-sociable networks that process this information differently? So here now, a whole range of quite complex statistical methods are all related to concepts in DMO, and big data coming to place a how do we actually study how the brain processes information? How do we do this on the most statistically optical level? I don't have the time to guide you through the whole idea how we collect training data just believe me that machine the machine is called an FMRI which stands for Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging. It's cheaper. These can go into this tube and it captures slight magnetic variations that are induced by essentially how much energy you use to process information. And then once we get all this data, now Freddy comes in again. Because you will do all the analysis and can give you a little bit more detail how we actually process this information, but I can tell you already with this work you're able to find and identify that indeed those different moral predictions are processed and disociable which is different neurological structures which gives us something that indeed. It isn't biological foundation of [INAUDIBLE]. So I'm asking that I'm saying that say we can make the link from our recall that behavioral world where we look at content unfolds event after how people behave to the neural world. How about logical structures our brains processes information? Would it be cool if we can actually use the biology? Variants generated in our brains to predict behavior outcomes in the we world. This sounds really crazy right now is a new procedure new paradigm. If you want that became some traction in the last three, six years installed the brain as predictor of approach that actually uses information on how you process stimuli out there. In your brain and uses this variance generated in your brain to predict subsequent future behavior comes off the person measure even more crazy, even for behavior of people unrelated to the person who actually measure different spots. So this all will be explained sort of research program and almonds together much more to say a great little bit. Freddy can talk more about on the action [INAUDIBLE].
