Options

[DISCLAIMER]

The Wisdom of My Late Stepmom

Earlier, I listened to the track “Options”, from the Su & Tye – EP (2025), by Sule and Tye Cooper. The song features The Hoodies and Black Soprano Family, and it was produced by Harlem Zone and Nyckles.

The track opens by stating that “the same things that make you smile will make you cry.” When contemplating the lyrics, I’m reminded of someone who was once quite meaningful to me when she was alive and who continues to remain as a source of wisdom for me in her death.

Featured in the photo above is the most influential figure I’ve ever personally known. Although she died in 2020, I recall the words of my late stepmom, as though she expressed them only moments ago, saying, “The same thing’ll make you laugh’ll make you cry.” Per ChatGPT:

The quote “Same things that make us laugh, makes us cry” suggests that there is a connection between humor and sadness. It implies that the emotions we feel when we are happy and when we are sad are not so different, and that they can be triggered by similar experiences or situations.

I partially agree and partially disagree with the generative artificial intelligence (AI) advanced chatbot (ChatGPT). The quote often expressed by my stepmom suggested a connection between humor, happiness, crying, and sorrow, as emotive experiences are different from one another.

However, irrespective of what ChatGPT asserts, these reactions aren’t “triggered” by “experiences or situations.” To better understand why I reject the AI chatbot’s claim, it may be of use to discuss Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT).

REBT

First, REBT uses the ABC model to illustrate that when an undesirable Action occurs and you Believe an unhelpful narrative about the event, it’s your unfavorable assumption, not the occurrence itself, that causes an unpleasant Consequence.

In particular, there are four irrational beliefs which people often use: global evaluations, low frustration tolerance, awfulizing, and demandingness. When contemplating these unproductive beliefs, think of the acronym GLAD. For instance, consider the following examples:

(G)lobal evaluations – “Life isn’t worth living if I’m not accepted by other people.”

(L)ow frustration tolerance – “I can’t stand not being accepted by other people.”

(A)wfulizing – “It would be awful if I weren’t accepted by other people.”

(D)emandingness – “I must be accepted by other people.”

From a psychological standpoint, people upset themselves using a Belief-Consequence (B-C) connection. Of course, this isn’t to suggest that in the context of the naturalistic or physical world there is no Action-Consequence (A-C) connection.

For instance, from an A-C outlook, a ChatGPT query (Action) reportedly consumes anywhere from 0.3 watt-hours to 2.5 to 40 watt-hours of energy (Consequence), depending on the question posed to AI. In the naturalistic world, AI searches (Action) consume electricity (Consequence).

However, from a B-C perspective, when AI use causes surges in energy usage (Action) and one Believes, “AI is unproductive [G] and intolerable [L], because terrible [A] drains on electricity shouldn’t exist [D],” then this unhelpful GLAD narrative may cause irritability (Consequence).

Addressing how people upset themselves with unhelpful attitudes, the ABC model incorporates Disputation of unproductive philosophies of life in order to explore Effective new beliefs. Whereas rigid beliefs cause self-disturbance, flexible beliefs result in an un-disturbed condition.

The process of Disputing unaccommodating Beliefs can take longer than I care to demonstrate herein. Thus, in the interest of time, imagine that after a period of rigorous challenge to one’s unhelpful GLAD narrative, an individual eventually uses the following Effective new belief:

Although I don’t appreciate AI use, it isn’t entirely unproductive. Apparently, many individuals use it. Hence, the increase in energy use. Thus, AI clearly is worthwhile to lot of people. As well, even though I don’t like increased energy consumption, I can tolerate ChatGPT usage.

Moreover, being trapped in a car at the bottom of a lake with minutes of oxygen remaining may be “terrible,” though “drains on electricity” by AI isn’t the same as this car scenario. So, ChatGPT usage isn’t at all “terrible.” Also, who am I to say what should or shouldn’t exist in life?

Second, REBT uses unconditional acceptance (UA) to relieve self-induced suffering. This is accomplished through use of unconditional self-acceptance (USA), unconditional other-acceptance (UOA), and unconditional life-acceptance (ULA).

Whereas the ABC model is a scientific approach to wellness, UA serves as a philosophical method for un-disturbing yourself. I view the former as an abortive approach to disturbance and the latter as a preventative method. Of course, not all REBT practitioners use the same style as I.

With my approach to REBT, I incorporate author Stephen Covey’s concepts regarding the circles of control, influence, and concern, as well as an area of no concern. UA maps onto the circle of control (USA), circle of influence (UOA), and circle of concern and area of no concern (ULA).

The circle of control encompasses only oneself, the circle of influence encapsulates elements which may be subject to one’s sway, the circle of concern engrosses most matters one can imagine, and the area of no concern relates to all content which isn’t yet imagined.

In the interest of time, imagine that one helpfully concludes, “I can control only myself—and to a limited degree [USA]. Also, I have virtually zero influence over people who use AI [UOA] or ChatGPT itself [ULA]. Thus, I refuse to self-disturb about an issue that isn’t mine to resolve.”

Given the ABC model and UA approaches discussed herein, in consideration of the A-C and B-C connections, I reject the AI chatbot’s claim about how feelings can be “triggered” by “experiences or situations.” From an REBT perspective, people trigger themselves!

The Distinction between Distress and Disturbance

Reflecting upon the wisdom of my late stepmom, in view of the REBT principles discussed herein, I think it’s worth noting the distinction between distress and disturbance. According to one REBT source (page 71):

REBT conceptualizes [distress] as healthy even though it is intense. Other approaches to therapy have as their goal the reduction of the intensity of negative emotions. They take this position because they do not keenly differentiate between healthy negative emotions (distress) and unhealthy negative emotions (disturbance).

Now, REBT keenly distinguishes between healthy distress and unhealthy disturbance. Healthy distress stems from your rational beliefs about a negative activating event [i.e., Action], whilst disturbance stems from your irrational beliefs about the same event.

When providing psychoeducational lessons about REBT, I often find that people don’t understand what constitutes a rational or irrational belief, as referenced by earlier the REBT source. Thus, in a blogpost entitled Rational Versus Irrational Thoughts and Beliefs, I stated:

“Logic” is a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration. It also addresses the interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable.

“Reason” is a statement offered in explanation or justification. In simple terms, it’s the thing that makes a fact intelligible. Unlike what occurs with limited time in my sessions with clients, when teaching people about rational thinking through use of my blog I often use syllogisms.

Generally, a syllogism is comprised of a major premise, a minor premise, and a resulting conclusion. For the sake of argument and understanding, it’s inferred that both premises which lead to a conclusion are presumed to be true.

Bear in mind that the premises in an argument, proposition, supposition, thought, or belief of this form will always lead to the conclusion. This is the case even when the premises aren’t actually true.

Equally, in order to be considered “rational” the argument, proposition, or belief empirically must remain in accordance with both logic and reason. Otherwise, the proposed syllogism may simply follow logical form while not remaining in accord with reason. As an example:

Form (modus ponens) –

If it is true that p, then it is also true that q; p; therefore, q.

Broken down into its specific premises, this form of syllogism is as follows:

Premise 1: If it is true that p, then it is also true that q.

Premise 2: It is true that p.

Conclusion: Therefore, it is also true that q.

A simpler form of writing this type of syllogism is as follows:

If p, then q; p; therefore, q.

Example –

If a robot is programmed to rid the world of cancer, then the robot will kill everyone that has cancer. A robot is programmed to rid the world of cancer. Therefore, the robot will kill everyone that has cancer.

This syllogistic example follows logical form. However, I argue that from a human perspective it isn’t reasonable. This is because the inferred meaning related to ridding the world of cancer relates to the preservation of life. Thus, killing everyone that has cancer defeats the purpose.

With this understanding, healthy distress (e.g., annoyance) stems from one’s rational beliefs (i.e., that which remains in accordance with both logic and reason) regarding a negative Action, while disturbance (e.g., enragement) stems from one’s irrational beliefs about the same event.

REBT Optionality

Bringing together lessons expressed herein, my late stepmom basically used syllogistic wisdom by maintaining, “The same thing’ll make you laugh’ll make you cry.” In specific, she used a modus ponens syllogism: If you use a Belief, then that Belief will cause Consequences.

Here’s where “Options” by Sule and Tye Cooper is relevant. People have options regarding whether or not they will laugh or cry, experience happiness or sadness, and so forth and so on. Rather than being “triggered” by “experiences or situations,” Beliefs cause these outcomes.

Particularly, rational or irrational beliefs cause healthy distress or unhealthy disturbance. Although I realize that consideration of this REBT perspective defies conventional conceptions of A-C connections which supposedly trigger feelings, B-C connections explain these outcomes.

When envisioning REBT optionality (the potential for options), a single Action – when paired with Beliefs – can generally result in four obvious Consequences. Herein, I’ll use the death of my stepmom for the sake of enriching your understanding.

Option one –

My stepmom dies and I’m informed of her death (Action). I then use the delusional Belief, “She’s not dead! Nope. She’s still alive. Any day now, she’s gonna call me. I just know it!” With this illogical and unreasonable attitude, I feel very little at all, if anything (Consequence).

Option two –

My stepmom dies and I’m informed of her death (Action). I then Believe, “Oh well, we all die. She was no exception to this inescapable rule of life.” With this logical and reasonable philosophy of life, albeit admittedly blunt, I feel numb (Consequence).

Option three –

My stepmom dies and I’m informed of her death (Action). I then use the distress-inducing Belief, “She preferably shouldn’t have died before I had a chance to say goodbye. All the same, I have no control or influence in this matter.” I then feel sad (Consequence).

Option four –

My stepmom dies and I’m informed of her death (Action). I then use the disturbance-inducting Belief, “Life is worthless [G], because I can’t stand that she’s gone [L]! It’s awful without her [A], and she absolutely shouldn’t have died [D],” as I then become depressed (Consequence).

Personally, option three is preferable. As well, it isn’t necessarily pathological to grieve the loss of a loved one. Furthermore, bear in mind that the Action for each of the aforementioned options didn’t change. Also, remember what you learned earlier from one REBT source (page 71)

REBT keenly distinguishes between healthy distress and unhealthy disturbance. Healthy distress stems from your rational beliefs about a negative activating event [i.e., Action], whilst disturbance stems from your irrational beliefs about the same event.

Ergo, REBT optionality concerns the syllogistic wisdom of my late stepmom: “The same thing’ll make you laugh’ll make you cry.” What you tell yourself will cause how you feel. Consequently, you have options, not triggers. So, what option will you use during your next negative Action?

If you’re looking for a provider who tries to work to help you understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.

As the world’s foremost hip hop-influenced REBT psychotherapist, I’m pleased to try to help people with an assortment of issues from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.

At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply trying to help you to feel better, I want to try to help you get better!

Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW

References:

Apple Music. (n.d.). Black Soprano Family. Apple Inc. Retrieved from https://music.apple.com/us/artist/black-soprano-family/1511788615

Apple Music. (n.d.). Su & Tye – EP. Apple Inc. Retrieved from https://music.apple.com/us/album/su-tye-ep/1818909646

Apple Music. (n.d.). Sule. Apple Inc. Retrieved from https://music.apple.com/us/artist/sule/1337100913

Apple Music. (n.d.). The Hoodies. Apple Inc. Retrieved from https://music.apple.com/us/artist/the-hoodies/1583974634

Apple Music. (n.d.). Tye Cooper. Apple Inc. Retrieved from https://music.apple.com/us/artist/tye-cooper/1438935989

ChatGPT With Me. (2023, May 1). Meaning of “same things that make us laugh, makes us cry.” Anim Mouse, ChatGPT, and Gemini. Retrieved from https://chatgptwith.me/posts/meaning-of-same-things-that-make-us-laugh-makes-us-cry/

Dryden, W. and Neenan, M. (2006). Rational emotive behaviour therapy: 100 key points and techniques. Routledge. Retrieved from https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/4b0e2552-2a18-4998-b44f-3a993148f7ac/downloads/REBT%202.pdf?ver=1627365797554

Genius. (n.d.). Harlem Zone. Retrieved from https://genius.com/artists/Harlem-zone

Genius. (n.d.). Nyckles. Retrieved from https://genius.com/artists/Nyckles

Hollings, D. (2024, May 22). A philosophical approach to mental health. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/a-philosophical-approach-to-mental-health

Hollings, D. (2025, August 26). A preventative approach to self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/a-preventative-approach-to-self-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2024, May 24). A scientific approach to mental health. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/a-scientific-approach-to-mental-health

Hollings, D. (2024, July 9). Absolutistic should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/absolutistic-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2025, August 26). An abortive approach to self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/an-abortive-approach-to-self-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2024, November 15). Assumptions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/assumptions

Hollings, D. (2024, August 7). Awfulizing. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/awfulizing

Hollings, D. (2023, July 2). Can’t go out sad. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/can-t-go-out-sad

Hollings, D. (2022, May 17). Circle of concern. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/circle-of-concern

Hollings, D. (2024, July 11). Concern and no concern. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/concern-and-no-concern

Hollings, D. (2023, April 22). Control. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/control

Hollings, D. (2024, October 27). Correlation does not imply causation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/correlation-does-not-imply-causation

Hollings, D. (2024, January 7). Delusion. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/delusion

Hollings, D. (2022, October 31). Demandingness. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/demandingness

Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer

Hollings, D. (2025, March 12). Distress vs. disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/distress-vs-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2024, July 10). Empirical should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/empirical-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2025, March 9). Factual and counterfactual beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/factual-and-counterfactual-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, May 17). Feeling better vs. getting better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feeling-better-vs-getting-better-1

Hollings, D. (2025, March 5). Five major characteristics of four major irrational beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/five-major-characteristics-of-four-major-irrational-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better

Hollings, D. (2023, September 13). Global evaluations. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/global-evaluations

Hollings, D. (2024, April 13). Goals. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/goals

Hollings, D. (2024, September 24). Happy place. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/happy-place

Hollings, D. (2024, August 9). Healthy concern. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/healthy-concern

Hollings, D. (2024, February 24). High frustration tolerance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/high-frustration-tolerance

Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/

Hollings, D. (2025, May 23). Inference chain. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/inference-chain

Hollings, D. (2024, May 10). Inferred meaning. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/inferred-meaning

Hollings, D. (2022, August 31). Iss-me vs. iss-you. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/iss-me-vs-iss-you

Hollings, D. (2025, June 13). It isn’t manly to be enraged. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/it-isn-t-manly-to-be-enraged

Hollings, D. (2025, March 4). Justification. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/justification

Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching

Hollings, D. (2022, December 9). Like it, love it, accept it. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/like-it-love-it-accept-it

Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason

Hollings, D. (2022, December 2). Low frustration tolerance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/low-frustration-tolerance

Hollings, D. (2022, June 23). Meaningful purpose. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/meaningful-purpose

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Modus ponens. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/modus-ponens

Hollings, D. (2024, September 27). My attitude. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/my-attitude

Hollings, D. (2025, August 2). My philosophy. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/my-philosophy

Hollings, D. (2023, September 3). On feelings. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-feelings

Hollings, D. (2023, April 24). On truth. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-truth

Hollings, D. (2025, May 3). Predictability of logic. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/predictability-of-logic

Hollings, D. (2024, July 10). Preferential should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/preferential-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, May 26). Principles. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/principles

Hollings, D. (2024, January 1). Psychoeducation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychoeducation

Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist

Hollings, D. (2022, March 24). Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT). Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-emotive-behavior-therapy-rebt

Hollings, D. (2025, August 13). Rational versus irrational thoughts and beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-versus-irrational-thoughts-and-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, March 14). REBT and emotions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rebt-and-emotions

Hollings, D. (2024, July 18). REBT flexibility. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rebt-flexibility

Hollings, D. (2024, January 20). Reliability vs. validity. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/reliability-vs-validity

Hollings, D. (2023, February 17). Revisiting the circle of control. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/revisiting-the-circle-of-control

Hollings, D. (2024, January 4). Rigid vs. rigorous. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rigid-vs-rigorous

Hollings, D. (2022, November 1). Self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/self-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2022, October 7). Should, must, and ought. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/should-must-and-ought

Hollings, D. (2023, October 17). Syllogism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/syllogism

Hollings, D. (2024, April 28). Talkin’ all that jazz. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/talkin-all-that-jazz

Hollings, D. (2023, September 6). The absence of suffering. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-absence-of-suffering

Hollings, D. (2022, December 23). The A-C connection. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-a-c-connection

Hollings, D. (2022, December 25). The B-C connection. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-b-c-connection

Hollings, D. (2023, August 6). The science. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-science

Hollings, D. (2024, February 6). This ride inevitably ends. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/this-ride-inevitably-ends

Hollings, D. (2025, February 28). To try is my goal. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/to-try-is-my-goal

Hollings, D. (2025, April 18). Tolerable FADs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/tolerable-fads

Hollings, D. (2025, January 9). Traditional ABC model. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/traditional-abc-model

Hollings, D. (2024, October 20). Unconditional acceptance redux. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unconditional-acceptance-redux

Hollings, D. (2023, March 11). Unconditional life-acceptance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unconditional-life-acceptance

Hollings, D. (2023, February 25). Unconditional other-acceptance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unconditional-other-acceptance

Hollings, D. (2023, March 1). Unconditional self-acceptance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unconditional-self-acceptance

Hollings, D. (2024, March 18). Unhealthy vs. healthy negative emotions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unhealthy-vs-healthy-negative-emotions

Hollings, D. (2023, May 12). Use of humor. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/use-of-humor

Hollings, D. (2024, September 29). Well, well, well. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/well-well-well

Sule Productions. (2025, June 16). Options (feat. The Hoodies) [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/iyMD9R4S6pc?si=kYLRY5oLm2ygcP57

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Chatbot. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatbot

Wikipedia. (n.d.). ChatGPT. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChatGPT

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Generative artificial intelligence. Retrieve from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_artificial_intelligence

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Stephen Covey. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Covey

You, J. (2025, January 7). How much energy does ChatGPT use? Epoch AI. Retrieved from https://epoch.ai/gradient-updates/how-much-energy-does-chatgpt-use