Yeah, I mean, I think that's it that is a real challenge problem. phenomenon, like it's really there. And and so the question is whether or not the importing, building a different structure, sort of in a, we're using Brene, brown, I think here is a sort of cipher, a representative of a larger way of operating in the modern, contemporary context, where empathy is sort of seen as the supreme virtue, which is something that, you know, Friedman was pointing out 20 years ago, that that was already current that what leaders need most is empathy. What leaders need most is empathy. And Friedman was the one waving the banner saying, I'm not sure that that's actually going to do what you think it's going to do. There's something else under under the surface there. But But given that that's a real problem. The question is, is empathy is the insistence on empathy is sort of a cardinal virtue, which is, I think, what's what is why it's there, part of what the reaction is that you've said, like people, then it given their negative experiences harmful experiences in a church context, find solace in other communities, even within the broader church, where empathy is sort of elevated, and then therefore, empathy becomes sort of an unassailable, unalloyed virtue. And I want to say, well, I want I want the care, I want Christlike compassion and care for sufferers. But then the other side of the coin, is sort of that we live in a moment where people's feelings and that's a slippery word in itself, right? people's emotions, people's passions. Part of our challenges are the vocabulary loss in relation to that sort of phenomenon, whatever we mean, when we say feelings and emotions, that people's feelings and passions are, are elevated as as, as God, right. Which, so and then empathy is I think, used can be used as a way of getting other people's feelings to be God. So other people's feelings become God. And, and, and, and so there's, you're trying to fight on two very different fronts there. One is, we haven't cared well, for real suffers. And instead of judge them harshly, or tried to correct their theology in the moment of pain, and we've driven them away, and I want to slap that down. And have I mean, I, you know, when I, one of the things when I first started to write on this, it was talking it through with some some friends and said, I want to go after this, this empathy thing, what I think is hiding under there and what that is, and they said, well, first, what's the other danger? Like, what's the what is that? What is that a reaction to? And so we talked that through and had some of the conversations about correct, you know, correction disguised as comfort. So when someone's in the middle of their, their pain, and someone comes along and said, Well, God works all things together for good. And it's like that's, that's true. And this isn't the time necessarily for that sort of correction disguised as comfort. And so their recommendation which I thought was wise was first hit that go ahead and direct some fire at that problem of uncompassionate compassion, or correcting compassion or whatever you would want to call it. And then having done that, Then take up the the danger that you really want to talk about in the present moment, which is the empathy thing. So I did that. But the interesting thing about the reaction is nobody reacted against the first thing, even though I was describing all things work together for good that statement as a demonic strategy. In certain context, nobody objected. Why are you putting all things work together for good in the mouth of the demons. And the reason I think, is because everybody recognized that was a problem. Everybody's experienced that everybody knows that's a problem. But what I don't think people are sufficiently maybe