In today's show, Dr. Howk discusses: 1. I think Jordan Peterson has done a fantastic job of exploring the evolutionary basis for Jungian archetypes. He appears to have a firm grasp on the literature, and he is convinced there is consilience between the two fields.  In particular, Peterson's synthesis places institutions such as Christianity in a dramatic new context. But then again, this is an argument I imagine Richard Dawkins would be vehemently opposed to. The debates on religion between Peterson and Sam Harris serve to illustrate this intellectual divide.  So where do you stand on this matter, Jen? Is Jordan Peterson right? Can we bridge the gap between Jung and EP? If yes, what implications does this have? If no, what convinced you? 2.  In a female dominanted enviroment...workplaces, when there is no man.  there there is an air of competitivness and cattyness, that can linger.. Once a man is introduced, even if he is not in a position of power, the relaxation is palpable.  Why is this?..why is the female competition not ramped up.....Why does the roster settle the hens? 3. My employer, like many others, is adopting many trainings and policies based around words like "equity", "inclusion", "systemic racism". I work in public sector for a large west coast city so my coworkers are very liberal and 72 percent non-white, so the majority view is very much "woke"   Obviously the answer is to just stay out of any discussion but are there any other strategies that I could use to avoid conflict with out having to pledge allegiance to "blank slateism"? How do you guys avoid the nasty labels that come with the uncomfortable insights of EP? Could we soon see widespread persecution of evolutionary thinkers?