So let's turn to this hidden brain episode of. I've picked out a couple excerpts from it. It's titled fighting despair, and it starts off with the host Shankar vedantam, describing in very vivid terms how cynicism separates us, both individually and collectively. Okay, so this is Shankar a few short years ago. If you needed to buy something, you would take a walk down to a court, to a corner shop or go to a mall. If you wanted to watch a movie, you went to a theater on nights you didn't want to cook, you stepped out to a restaurant. Shopping, entertainment and dining brought us into contact with other people waiting in line at checkout or standing in a crowded bar, we encountered a wide spectrum of humanity. Nice people, mean people, boring people. Today, many of us choose convenience and comfort over connection. Need something from the grocery store. Plug your order into your phone. Want to see a movie. Fire up Netflix on your computer. Need to check in on friends. Hop on Instagram. You can pay someone to walk your dog or stand in line for you at a concert. Dating apps allow you to check out potential mates from the safety of your couch. Why go out when you can order in sometimes? Time ago, the food delivery app seamless launched an ad campaign plastering signs all over the New York City subway in bright colors with big yellow font. The ads read over 8 million people in New York City, and we help you avoid them all. Then he says, How do we get here? When did the world become a place where friendship meant liking a photo? We are all born with eyes filled with wonder, we play, we laugh, we seek out friends, but at some point this changes. We erect defenses against the world. We pull back from strangers, we retreat into ourselves. And of course, to retreat into ourselves is to retreat into thoughts, thoughts about ourselves and others and the big, scary world. And then here's what Jamil says in in his interview with Shankar about how cynicism erodes trust, cynical people tell a story full of villains and then end up living it. And this is really useful, actually, for things like totalitarian regimes. One view of cynicism is often, well, it might not feel good, but it's moral, it's good for us or right for us to pay attention to injustice. And I certainly wouldn't disagree with that, but it's also true that cynics foreclose on the possibility of anything better, and when you lose faith or hope that things could get better, you stop trying. So in that excerpt, he's he's commenting on the association of being cynical with being smart or clever, having a sophisticated, enlightened view of injustice, as If cynicism were the opposite of being naive or gullible, but in fact, he says to be cynical is to be gullible because you're relying on a mental construct instead of impulsively trusting people. People, you're impulsively mistrusting them, and this works out great for totalitarian regimes, because so called strong man leaders give the impression of being in control over an otherwise dangerous and chaotic world. So the corrective that Jamil proposes is to become what he calls a hopeful skeptic. And this is how he defines it. The idea of hopeful skepticism is twofold. One, it's being open to evidence the way that scientists are. But two, it's understanding that our default is relatively negative and often too negative. We often miss the goodness in others, even when it's there so hopeful skepticism is an openness to the world that is complemented by the idea that, hey, people are probably better than I think, and if I pay attention, pleasant surprises might be everywhere. So what he's saying is that in order to be open to the goodness of others and the goodness that does exist in the world, in order to see beyond our habitual, cynical negative thoughts. We need to first recognize that thoughts are not reliable, and then we need to pay attention to what is and