Hi, I'm Dave Liss a DC-based consultant, and journalist. Your host for this series of podcasts. Wellness Musketeers, where we will discuss a wide range of topics in the field of health. Wellness fitness with some management economics thrown in as well.
In this episode, we are joined by our guest panelist, Greg LeBlanc, from the business schools at Stanford and Berkeley, where he teaches business economics, data science, and decision-making. He has also taught at duke UVA, N H E C Paris.
Greg is the host of the podcast Unsiloed. The podcast is a series of interdisciplinary conversations that inspire new ways of thinking about our world. And each episode, Greg interviews, a world-leading thinker, researcher, academic economist,
Nobel prize winner and other truly globally acclaimed thought leaders and authors. Greg will be interviewed by our cohost Ketil Hviding.
Ketil Hviding is one of the core members of the wellness Musketeers team, an economist by training, and a professional with the IMF. He's been active in the wellness field for a number of years. Boring economist at the surface, a crazy guy within, as he would put it.
Hi welcome Greg.
Very very, happy to have you here. I would like before we start, I would like to note that I have known Greg for quite a few years. I'd like to note that Greg is probably the closest, it gets to a a person being true Renaissance man.
Both in his quest for knowledge across disciplines, his sense of dialogue, and his sense of physical pursuit as well. Pursuit. Skiing and polo. If you didn't know, Greg has also, as you may have.
With this intro, an excellent cook, which I have benefited from quite a few times. So far, Greg has released 150 episodes since he launched his podcast 14 months ago. This amounts to releasing about three episodes a week. You also pride yourself on always reading the books of the authors that you interview.
Hidden in these factors.
Mental processing achievement of God. Again, Dimensions. How is this possible
greg?
This is actually something that I try to teach my MBA students and my law students, which is how do you expose yourself to the massive amounts of information that we have in the world today? And then compress it in a way that allows you to understand it and recall it. Whenever you need to extract some kind of insight, right? So it's about.
Collecting frameworks collecting. Organizing principles connected to collecting models. Of the world. And then when you observed the world or experienced the world, figure out ways to identify which frameworks. We'll help you understand. The phenomenon. And so, it's really, I like to think of it as a compression algorithm.
Which it's about making yourself efficient. In terms of the pursuit of knowledge.
Oh, is. That's very interesting. You state in your post coast. The big city on the website that is Unsiloed is a series of in this interdisciplinary conversation, then inspires new ways of thinking.
You also know that teaching philosophy, your teaching philosophy is built on the idea that knowledge is built on an accumulation of multiple perspectives, stress tested by dialogue, discussion, and debate. It all sounds like a day in the life or so, Curtis. Bumping into great authors in a town square. You might like that image by the way.
But you are a modern man after all. You must really have an agenda. Don't you?
I was reading Plato at a very young age and I thought wouldn't it be cool if you could in fact walk down to the town square and bump into all these people? It actually requires a little bit more, more work than that. Even universities are, not the places that I thought they would be when I was growing up. I thought when I go to a university.
I'm going to walk down the hallways. The building. Run into all these smart people from all these different domains and stir up all these wonderful conversations. But. Even in universities, people are, very very specialized they're, very dedicated to the pursuit of something. Now, for the most part, they have KPIs that they have to Pursue, they have. Publications that they have to get out and they have kind of tenure that they have to.
I have to chase assets, even in the places where you would think. You might find the most.
I don't know. Fertile discussions. It's, sometimes a little bit difficult. You have to bring it out. You have to tease it out. And, so I think the idea of interdisciplinarity is, really. Getting people to. I guess it emerged from their foxholes and dip their toes and other Fox holes. And so a lot of the authors that I bring onto the podcast or are folks that I think have had.
I have done that to some degree. You know that they've. They've looked at issues from a couple of different perspectives and found insight. In the gaps, found insight. By maybe. Looking at history from an economic lens or looking at anthropology from a philosophical lens, or maybe looking at a law firm, from a literary criticism lens.
And it's those see the accumulation of those perspectives that, that helps you to, I think I think to find insight and yeah, one of the dangers that we always fall into is we've got a perspective. We've got a way of looking at things and it's comfortable. It's super easy and comfortable to consult that template.
That template has guided us so well. Having one. Google map. Helps us to get from point a to point B. And so I think that it's, difficult to resist the temptation to fall into that kind of unity of perspective which is very comfortable. So.
if I have an agenda my agenda is to stir that up and help people find comfort in discomfort. I help people too. Shed their skin and look for new skins and get them out of the place where they're standing and look at the same phenomenon from, a different place, from a different, side of the issue, maybe a different side Of the academic discipline. that's, really my agenda to stir that, stir the pot a little bit. And get people thinking.
But I think you're a good thing. My question is a little bit, because how do you decide which books to pick up?
That's a great question. I've been a book. Collectors since I was very. I'm not a collector in the sense that I don't really go after first additions or any of that kind of nonsense, but I've been. Spending most of my disposable income on books since I was very, young. I was.
In college, I would eat, potatoes and then go buy books. And so I've always had huge piles of books around me. And how do I find out about the books? That's a great question. Whether it's TLS or New York review of books or financial times or wall street journal or New York Times or a lot of times people reference other people in the books, but.
But I'm always looking for a book that it's going to tell me something. I don't already know. So it's if I start reading a book and it starts sounding like something that I've already read before then It bores me and I kinda wanna move on and go find something else. So, I'm always.
Looking for things that are relatively fresh and new. But that seems grounded in a sense of curiosity When I think of it.
Research with integrity. People who are deeply interested in. Discovering. The truth, rather than pursuing an agenda necessarily if they have an agenda, the agenda flows from what they've learned, rather than starting with the agenda, then working backward.
Maybe linked to the question of soak practice. I know, that your, interviews are quite consensual, maybe it's not the right word, but you're trying to get the author to speak about it. Their books are on their terms. In very few cases, do you actually challenge them? Is there any room for maybe a little more of a Socratic in the dialogue here? A few of your words. This month, the author mentioned. Some of the grades. The dialogues and maybe we can look forward to. And the silos develop into some kind of virtual so crazy. The invention and the new space.
Yeah. I had a couple of people comment that when they interact with me in real life, I'm a little more.
I can testify to that. You stick with a position and in order to. convince you either have to get you so drawn to with. This is very hard. That you cannot give in that way. I need to spend pretty much a whole night trying to argue against you. Or common friends have been trying I'm generally giving up.
It's a fair question. In fact, when I first thought of doing a podcast, it was probably about over 20 years ago. And I remember thinking that the people who are. Dominant in the space, right? Charlie rose and NPR interviewers, Terry Gross, and so forth.
That they didn't really call someone out when they. Said something that didn't make any sense. And so I thought Hey if I ever have a podcast like I'm going to call people out if they don't seem to make any sense. One of the things is I selected authors that I think. On the whole, make, make a lot of sense. But the other thing is that when I read a book.
There are lots of things in the book that I find. Maybe is less well supported than other things, but. I've never read a book in my life that I didn't get something out of. I've never read a book where I didn't learn something. Okay. And usually when I'm reading a book or when I'm watching a movie or something or going to a lecture.
I'm always asking. You know what. What can I learn from this? What can I get out of this? What insight is here? And so sometimes I'll be sitting through a lecture and. I'll be like, okay. Nothing is probably wrong. It's probably wrong. This is dubious, et cetera. And then they'll say something and I'll be like, oh that's, something that I can learn from right?
And even when people are saying things that are incorrect or dubious, I think. Okay, I can learn something there too. So, I'm usually when I'm. Interviewing the authors. I'm thinking about the things that I've learned from them or the things that I. Find insightful. So I try to emphasize that now when they do say something that I think is a little dubious.
My way of dealing with it is, to maybe. Ray's a bit of doubt. And maybe put that little green in the oyster. And let the listener. Allowed to pro-like substance. Late around that little grain or put the little pebble in the shoe and let the listener. Experience a little bit of discomfort. Because at the end of the day all of these authors, I would love to have much longer conversations with where we can.
Kind of. Jointly. Create some kind of. New insight. But given the time constraints, what can we learn from this author? What are the most insightful things that are embedded in the works that they've published?
So maybe turn back again to the agenda issue. It seems to me that. In this space of kind of topics of the books that you're covering go for. Several categories. One is pretty close to actually what you're teaching. So clearly related to business. In some way on other data science, for instance, But then there is a whole group of them and actually quite a large group.
Which is more in the space that we are focusing on wellness space though. That's of course very ill-defined the wellness is super fine. But again there, it seems like it's maybe more personal as well. It's called So my question is what, are you looking for there?
I don't think of there being a dichotomy there. When I teach business strategy, for instance, A lot of times, I end the class by talking about how everything we learned about business strategy can be applied to career strategy or to personal strategy. And I don't generally see this big, dichotomy. The sort of business side of your existence or the professional side of your existence and the personal side of your existence.
I'm really super interested in the cultivation of what might call a kind of virtue. And, I think of that from a personal perspective, but also think of that from an organizational. Perspective, if there is such a thing. And, ultimately that comes from.
Traits like curiosity and a desire for kind of versatility. And, the flexibility of mindset. And if there's a unifying principle of all of the podcasts it's, really about this cultivation Of an intellectual virtue. And I think that intellectual virtue. Is at the heart of. Concept of wellness, right? So if you think about Aristotle's original conception of. Your diamond Nia, which is essentially happiness, it's a type of happiness. It's a lot of the podcasts that I've had and a bunch that I've recorded and haven't released yet are really focusing on this concept.
Of happiness and by happiness we don't mean. Just enjoying the good life. Americans think of it as a good life, but really what does it mean to be? Virtuous person. And I think that the life of the intellect is, a big part of what it means to be a virtuous person, the pursuit of. Truth and beauty and goodness. And maybe I'm probably emphasizing the truth piece.
More than, the other two. I'm going to have to spend a little bit more time on those other two in order to have a fully well-rounded interdisciplinary program. But I, really do think of all these things as about how do you cultivate the sense of, intellectual virtue?
But the quest for truth can be somewhat disquieting sometimes.
Absolutely right. Comfort in the conventional sense is not what I'm after. Cause comfort is a trap. Comfort is comfort. A lot of the folks that I've talked to are evolutionary psychology and evolutionary biology. As an organism, we're, all trying to conserve our energy usage and thinking is work. And when you look at people who are working out in the gym, what are they doing? They're spending a ton of energy. And it's unnatural in a way, but. Bye. Learning how to really enjoy that.
Kind of energy expenditure. And once you get in the habit of it, people. Find that not exercising. If you become a habitual exerciser and then you don't exercise, you feel off, you feel uncomfortable. So how do we, make conventional comfort uncomfortable?
And how do you make it so that the state of continual searching or seeking? Is your, comfort zone. I remember. Hearing people say that they didn't like to wear ties. I remember on the east coast, we used to all wear ties and jackets. I remember people saying, I don't like to wear a tie because it makes me uncomfortable as if there's some kind of.
There's some kind of platonic sense of comfort that involves loose next. And this is not true, because if you're aware of Ty every day, then you feel uncomfortable when you're not wearing a tie. And so, how do we make it so that the life of the mind, the life of, thinking and questioning and seeking and searching?
That's like your comfort zone. And if you're not doing it. You feel like something's off, right? If you're just getting lazy in yours. And you're not using your brain and you're just reaching for. These, robotic responses and you're on a kind of mental autopilot, like how do we make it so that you feel uncomfortable? You feel.
And authentic, you feel. Insincere, you feel like you're lacking integrity in some way. That's kind of part of my goal.
Maybe this is even linked to some of the books that you. Incurring on the fiscal world as well, because. Think about. Trying to kill all, germs and the body is a good quiet thing. Don't build the roads to kill you.
And we have to live with it. And the same with elegance. We do have to get used to and live with, things that they could. They would potentially make us allergic. And then with, to the extent we. Remove ourselves from exposure. It also is dead. And so the quiet.
Less life. Both in physical and intellectual terms.
Yeah. You said physical. I thought you said fiscal. It was like, wait, hold on. I was putting on my economist hat.
Exactly. But, there actually is a connection. There's a connection there. Yeah. Yeah. When I teach my classes at business school, you learn that. And when the first week that the answer to every question is it depends. In fact, my students have given me these mugs that say, it depends on them. And they actually gave me a red button with my recorded voice saying it depends. And so every time When I was doing my online classes, I would just hit that button, like Jim Cramer to create a sound effect. But that's if you really embraced it, The economic way of thinking. You, learn that. That, that That everything does too.
Depend now, but that sends means of course, is that. The application of any individual model. Require some input, it also, what it means is that. You should be suspicious of any kind of monitor, or ethnicity in a claim. So if someone says Hey drinking is bad.
It's like, all right That may be a great conclusion at the end of the day, but I want to hear all the arguments in favor of drinking and all the arguments against drinking before we moved to any kind of. And rule and starting with the assumption that we're probably gonna be able to find arguments on both sides, which means that there's probably going to be some.
Some trade-offs right? And then if we understand those trade-offs, then we can figure out okay, where's the optimal amount here? And when we think about, oh, bacteria is bad. Okay. immediately, my radar goes up and says, okay there's, something wrong here.
Or even if somebody says pain is bad hold on. Let's, I'm suspicious here too. There's gotta be an upside to pain or poverty, is bad. Hold on. Like maybe there's, not If you make it a habit of always before I even get a sentence out of my mouth,
I've got part of my brain. That's already trying to figure out what is wrong with what I just said.
And so it makes it difficult sometimes to be bombastic and To be provocative, but it also makes you a difficult person within an organization. So we had a meeting with the faculty just. A week ago and the administrator come out and said, okay, here's what we're going to. We've made a decision. We're going to do this. And here are all the arguments in favor.
And I'm just thinking in my brain what are all the arguments against? And, their view their, thinking. Since we've already made the decision, there's really no point in telling anybody any of the counter-arguments let's just because now we're in sales mode. We're going to, we're gonna, we're gonna, we're gonna push this end up in
the tone hole and say this, or did you just think it? No, I just.
So you are not. You're not as courageous as some other person. I'm thinking.
I did that for 10 years and then I realized that it just made enemies. So I just I've learned. Be it. Be a team player. Just to say that. even, if I'm suspicious of their judgment simply because they did not. Start off by saying, here are the arguments in favor here, the arguments against which we weighed them and we came out in favor. And that's what I tell my students whenever I say, okay, so what should you know, what should this company do?
And they're like they should do this. And I'm like timeout, Okay. You, got this backward, you started with the conclusion and then you're going to give me the arguments in favor, or of your conclusion. I'm always more convinced if you say, okay, we should do the thing, which gives us the following result.
Okay. And then here are the different Approaches, or here are the different reasons why we should do this or not do this. And then after you input the data, We come to this conclusion. So like a conclusion without a transparent.
The thought process behind it. To me is, just worthless. I need to see them, I need to see how the argument is constructed and one of the big things that I teach all my students are like,
Most people will conceal the steps that lead to the conclusion, not just when they are. Arguing with other people when they're arguing with themselves. And by concealing the links in the argumentative chain, what they're doing is they are covering any kind of weaknesses. And so they're, covering it over primarily because they don't want to have to deal with it.
It's not just that they don't want other people to point them out, but they themselves don't want to have to deal with it. And this is, this to me is crazy. Would you ever go into the boxing ring without having had. A bunch of sparring partners does their best to beat the crap out of you, right? And yet people do this all the time when they go into discussions and I've seen this happen with. Ph.D. students that will go on the job market and their visors and mentors failed to. Expose the weaknesses and their arguments and their, classmates failed to expose the weaknesses in their arguments. And then they just get ripped to pieces when they're out there on the job market.
It was really good. I think we could continue the whole day talking about the subject. I think what we should do, we probably should end it quite soon. But also to agree on meeting again later this year to wrap up. More on your kind of experiences, the interviews that you're doing, because I do think there's an enormous amount of very good material here that I think the Audience can really benefit from and a mostly looking forward to your next book. Maybe your. It's quoted. It depends. I'm going to show that title set. We'll sell that well, though. My students
will buy it.
Sure. But That kept your audience. Before we end. What do you think is the most important takeaway that you have gained so far in your gesture? You have probably had 150 podcasts, but you have actually recorded to her. Other than 50. I gave you the road to you. The final word.
What have I learned? Wow. What I've learned is that there are a lot of really thoughtful, smart, intelligent people out there. And it's really, hard to remember that when we are exposed to it. The kind of stuff we hear in the public square. So it's easy to lose hope. It's easy to lose.
Faith in kind of the future of, intellectual discourse. Because the public realm is, one where. Good quality intellectual discourse is not rewarded, we live in a world of, clickbait and we live in a world of. Twitter bombast. And it's hard to remember that there are these.
Super smart people there. Thinking very seriously about important issues of science and philosophy and the good life. And for me, the good life. Is one that has at its center. The pursuit of those things we talked about. Truth, beauty, and goodness.
And anything I can do through the podcast to remind people that this is Legitimate pursuit. Is if I do anything to move the needle in that direction, then I think I've done my job.
Thanks a lot, guys.
Of course. I told you that you were going to have the last word, but you didn't. I lied. Of course.
It's been a great pleasure talking to you. I would end off with making a page for you your, podcast series, because. It's an enormous amount of material. On exactly what you're saying about very smart people who've been thinking very hard about some subjects
Any academic environment than going the extra mile of actually putting out the book there. They don't generally don't need that. In academia, it's articles that pay off. Probably. Articles that actually published books. And bring it out to the public. And this podcast series is helping us have access to this.
And so in order to listen to this and really hope that we can bring this audience. To increase Mang manyfold. They own the world. It's just to type in unsiloed U N S I L O E D and then it will come up podcast. Of course. So instead of actually going back to this whole crisis time, this is a good second.
For modern men and women girl and boy.
Thanks for having me on the show.
We appreciate your joining us, Greg. Be sure to listen to Unsiloed on siloed a series of interdisciplinary conversations that inspire new ways of thinking about our world available on apple, Google podcast, and YouTube. And thank you for joining us for wellness Musketeers. Tune in for upcoming episodes to learn from global health leaders.
And trendsetting authors to gain tools to improve your life, and your health. Your work performance and enjoy a more balanced quality of life. Please subscribe, and give us a five-star review. Share this recording with your family, friends, and colleagues.
Let us know what you need to learn to help you live your best life. Send your questions and ideas for future episodes to Dave at davidmliss@gmail.com