I also have just come up with a book for a general audience. The book is called Theodosia and the Pirates, and though it is just fiction, it contains a lot of truth. Even some truth about morality, the evolution of morality, and how language and non-verbal communication actually work.
Much of what is in the book is what I have always believed. But there are certain contributions that Bow has made to my writing. For instance, the sequences surrounding Theodosia's pleasure cry come from my analysis of how involuntary vocalizations -- in Bow's case, those about food -- are for the benefit of others, not the individual crying out.
It is only after working with Bow that I have come to fully appreciate that intentional communication is full of lies, but unintentional non-verbal cues are the way nature provided for others to learn the truth despite the deceit of the speaker.
While all of the intellectual giants in the universities are lauding the ways in which the weak are protected in moral societies, my book deals with survival issues, and how it is that exposure to disease strengthens populations, while being sheltered from disease weakens.
I am not a Biblical moralist, but I do think that we can see the evolutionary reason why in the ten commandments there is a provision for honoring one's father and mother, but no provision for taking care of babies and the young.
Not only has Bow helped me to understand many of these issues of emerging morality, I share my discoveries with him by reading what I have written aloud.
Bow can be a harsh critic at times. But I do not shelter myself from his criticism. If he disagrees with a position I have taken, he can tell me to my face.
Watch his eyes as I read the book. Who do you think he favors as the better philosopher: Aristotle or Benjamin Franklin?