I'm not a groupie person really at all. I don't really care about sports, I don't really care about teams. I did not care about baseball at all. I really it was only there because I was so smitten with him. Meana Chikara is telling me about an early date she had with her husband, Carrie. Carrie is an avid Boston Red Sox fan. So they decided to check out a game against the Sox archrivals the Yankees, and they did so in enemy territory, Yankee Stadium.

He is a little bit risk seeking, and so he decided to wear his Red Sox hat to this game. Even just getting off at the subway station was already a bunch of jokes and ribbing and look at this guy. And what was really interesting to me, though, was that it seemed very good hearted at first, right? It was just sort of people enacting the script. But as the game wore on, the score got closer and closer and the entire stadium grew tense.

The banter stopped being playful and Kerry wasn't reacting well. So at some point I decided I'm going to take the hat from him because I don't want him to get into a fist fight here. So I didn't have anywhere to put this hat. So I put it on my own head thinking I'm not a fan of either team. I really couldn't care less about this. No one's going to talk to me. No one's going to say anything. And I couldn't have been more wrong about that assumption.

So the second I put on the hat, people started calling me names. They started telling me about my mother. They started saying all manner of horrible things about me.

But there was a second assumption Nina was wrong about she thought if she got taunted, it wouldn't bother her. But within minutes of putting on that Red Sox cap, Mina found herself screaming at Yankee fans in the seats all around her. My husband actually had to put himself between me and this other guy. And this experience gave me this incredible insight, which was that by virtue of marking myself as a member of Red Sox nation, I started to get treated that way.

And once I started to receive that treatment, I started to react on behalf of Red Sox nation.

Menagh had unwittingly fallen prey to some of the most dangerous forces in all of human nature, our inter-group biases.

So it's that shift that happens when you approach an idea or an interaction, not through the lens of me and you, but rather through the lens of us and them. As humans, we naturally divide the world into groups and out groups and not just on sports fields. We also do so across political, ethnic, racial, national and ideological lines as well. The bonding we get from being part of a group can sometimes feel good. It can make us feel connected like we're part of something bigger than ourselves.

Put our partisan urges can also cause us to feel pretty miserable. They can steal opportunities to make meaningful connections with people who are different from us. They can make us feel angry at the other side and cause us to engage in nasty, sometimes even violent behaviors and our tendency towards us versus them. Thinking has even led to much worse outcomes than a dip in our personal happiness. These urges hinder important progress in politics. They can fuel lethal racist violence, deadly ethnic conflicts and some of the worst atrocities human history has ever seen.

By some counts, over 200 million civilians, not soldiers, civilians, perished in the last century as a result of large scale group violence. So in a time when our society is feeling more divided than ever, what can we do to avoid all the anger and bitterness? What can we do to fight the inter-group biases that lead to so much unhappiness? These are the very, very hard issues that will try to tackle scientifically in this season's final two episodes of The Happiness Lab.

Our minds are constantly telling us what to do to be happy, but what if our minds are wrong? What if our minds are lying to us? Leading us away from it will really make us happy. The good news is that understanding the science of the mind can point us all back in the right direction. You're listening to the happiness lab, the Dr. Larry Santo's. We left Mina's story with her screaming uncontrollably, having to be restrained by her boyfriend from squaring off with people she'd never met, her passions inflamed by a game she had zero interest in just hours before.

It may sound crazy that one little Red Sox hat could cause all that trouble, but yet it 100 percent happened and was actually the impetus for my dissertation.

Mina is now a professor of psychology at Harvard University. She's become a world expert on the neural underpinnings of our inter-group biases as we got to talking. I learned that Menas unfortunate foray into Red Sox fandom wasn't the first time she'd seen the dark side of our us versus them thinking, my dad is Serbian.

My mom is Bosnian. My entire family is from former Yugoslavia.

Meena and her parents moved to the United States in the 1980s, but her extended family stayed in former Yugoslavia as her homeland descended into bloody civil war.

You know, I would hear these harrowing stories of people who had been neighbors for decades, who had raised their children together. They had been friends. They had been in each other's weddings. And basically, when things took a turn politically, they turned on each other and murdered one another or tried to murder one another. And this was really, I mean, horrifying, but also really fascinating to me, in part because what it revealed to me was how quickly these dynamics can change.

The speed with which our group instincts can lead to all out violence is especially shocking because, generally speaking, humans really don't like doing bad things to one another.

Right. Did you punch somebody today? I have not punched somebody today. It's been a good day.

Have you punched anyone in the last month? No, in fact. OK, how about the last year? Actually, no, I'm I'm kind of non pintura most of the time.

Yeah, right. And what's really interesting about this is that there seem to be very strong moral prohibitions against harm that guide most people's behavior. Most of the time, decades and decades of psychological research show that we really don't like doing mean stuff. One study by the neuroscientist Molly Crocket found that participants were more reluctant to administer an electric shock to a stranger than they were to shock themselves. Harvard psychologist Fihri Cushman found that people even get queasy when they pretend to harm other people.

He had his subjects point a toy gun in someone's face or smashed the skull of a realistic looking plastic baby. Cushman found that even though people knew these mean actions were fake, they still showed a strong physiological reaction to doing them. They had an increased heart rate and other bodily signs of arousal, and participants showed these physiological reactions more when performing the fake actions themselves versus watching a similar action being performed by somebody else. We just hate doing mean stuff.

And yet every day we see videos of people doing violent things to strangers who've done them no harm. So that's this puzzle.

And what it suggests is that there had to be certain preconditions or certain factors in place in order for people to overcome this aversion to harm.

Menagh has spent the last decade studying what leads people down this awful road towards actively wanting to hurt members of other groups. She's found that the first step is what psychologists have christened the inter-group empathy gap. Normally, we feel sad when others are sad and a bit of empathic pain when others get hurt, but not always.

It wouldn't make sense for us to empathize with all people all the time, right? If we really felt the weight of every person in the world, we'd never get out of bed. And it turns out that more and more evidence indicates that these failures of empathy are particularly likely when targets are socially distant.

So when they belong to other social or ethnic groups, tons of studies show that we literally don't experience the pain of outgroup members the same way we do for people in our own group. There's evidence, for example, that white doctors are less likely to prescribe pain medication to their black patients. And even when such pain reducers are prescribed, they're given in lower quantities. Our indifference to other groups pain mean that even doctors can inadvertently cause people who are unlike them to suffer more than is necessary.

But an absence of empathy still doesn't mean that we're cool with knowingly causing bad things to happen to other people. To do that, we need to take the next troubling step on that dangerous inter-group path, one that summed up by a German word schadenfreude literally harm joy, schadenfreude, or really specifically refers to the malicious pleasure that people feel when they see another person suffering.

Oftentimes, if you just don't like someone, if you perceive that someone has acted in an unjust way, if they're undeserving or if you envy them, that these would all be precursors for feeling pleasure when you saw that person suffer misfortune.

But Mina wanted to know if schadenfreude could also be at the root of between group conflicts, too.

Would it be enough just to know that someone came from a different group in order to be able? Who engender this kind of aggressive, malicious pleasure? Human history has shown us that it's surprisingly easy to get people to feel schadenfreude towards outgroup members.

Sports is this great microcosm in which to study these dynamics because people not only feel allowed, but emboldened to say really horrible things about the outgroup. So what we realize is if we could just tap into individuals who identified as sports fans, that maybe we could get some honest responding when we just ask them how good does it make you feel to see this bad thing happen to these other folks?

Menagh recruited, of course, Red Sox and Yankees fans. She stuck them inside a brain scanner and showed them cartoon versions of baseball plays involving lots of different teams. But on the clinical trials, the ones Mina was really interested in, they got to watch good and bad things happen to their rivals.

What we found was that watching your rival fail engaged several different brain regions. But the only one that was associated with just how much pleasure participants said that they felt was this region called the ventral striatum.

The ventral striatum is part of our brains reward circuit. But this region doesn't just register. Hey, that event felt really good. It's also critically involved in learning. That means that when the ventral striatum is activated, it helps us decide how we personally should behave in the future.

It notes when there's a surprising positive event in the environment and says, OK, let's come back to taking the action that brought that event about, because that's going to be the thing that's going to be rewarding in the future.

Menas Red Sox fans were starting to make a mental connection between that great schadenfreude of feeling and the possibility that they could use their own personal behaviors to cause that nice feeling again, perhaps by actively harming someone else.

Those participants who exhibited that much more ventral societal activation in response to watching their rival fail for the same people who told me two weeks later that they would be that much more likely to heckle, hit and insult a rival fan so that, for me, established this suggestive link between the sort of pleasure of watching outgroup failure or harm and potentially the likelihood that it was related to your own desire to become the agent of harm and other circumstances.

And these awful dynamics don't just play out on sports fields. The same processes are at least partially at work in settings where people engage in more large scale violence, think ethnic cleansing like menas, family experience in Yugoslavia, or hate crimes against marginalized groups, or the long legacy of lethal violence that law enforcement personnel have inflicted on black people in the United States.

The processes MENA has observed in her baseball fans likely contribute to the many acts of racist violence we see in the news shockingly often, especially in cases where there are structural features in place to help inflame our sense of competition and increase our fear of the other side.

Now, understanding the processes that lead to these violent acts, of course, doesn't excuse them. I want to be super clear on that point, but Menas work is incredibly important here because it shows just how easily situational and structural factors can lead otherwise nonviolent people towards brutal actions. To me, the most striking thing about schadenfreude is not that it happens, but how quickly we can shift from empathy or indifference to taking pleasure in other people's pains, and that there are cases in which outgroup harm appears to be driven by just the sheer hedonic benefit.

It just feels good and I find that totally fascinating. Now, there are lots and lots of structural changes needed to stop the large scale intergroup violence we see all over the world. But Menas Work suggests that we might also be able to intervene psychologically to curb at least some parts of these often lethal downward cycles. And as is often the case in the happiness lab, part of the solution might involve recognizing the mistakes our minds are making all the time.

I've been talking a lot about how competition is doing quite a bit of work in these contexts. Right. And I think that a huge part of conflict escalation is actually a mistake that we make in intergroup contexts, which is that we don't deal with the person in front of us. Instead, what we're doing is we're dealing with some idea, some models, some stereotype of who they are. When we get back from the break, we'll examine how we can turn off our inter-group empathy gap and do so in a way that can not only make us happier, but also holds the promise of helping us to make society a kinder and less polarized place.

The Happiness Lab. We'll be right back.

A healthy lifestyle should be easy, right? Eat veggies, drink green smoothies, exercise to get your heart rate up. Do yoga to bring your heart rate back down.

Well, maybe it's not so easy, but there is something that helps improve everything. And you can do it with your eyes closed.

Its can't sleep, sleep no knows what it takes to sleep your best. The Sleep Number 360 Smart Bed lets you choose your ideal firmness, comfort and support on each side.

Your sleep number setting. It's the perfect solution for couples.

These beds are so smart they respond to your every move and automatically adjust to keep you sleeping comfortably all night long.

Proven quality sleep is life changing sleep and right now all beds are on sale during their biggest sale of the year.

Save 50 percent on the sleep number of 360 limited edition smart bed. You'll only find sleep number at sleep.

No stores or by visiting W-W sleep, no dotcom kadence that sleep. No Dotcom Cadence S.A. DNC. Marijuana, motorcycles and mayhem, deep cover is a true story. It begins with an FBI agent going undercover in a biker gang and it ends with, well, a war, a full scale U.S. invasion. I'm Jake Halpern. I'm a journalist. And for the story, I've been at dive bars, horse farms, backwater swamps. I've talked to FBI agents, pirate ran actors and a bunch of big time drug smugglers.

Listen to Deep Cover now and your favourite podcast app or deep cover pod dotcom brought to you by Pushkin Industries. I'm very worried. I think that there are lots of trends that are pushing us away from what is really our true natural state, which is to be interconnected with each other. That said, I'm not fatalistic. I think that there are things we can do to push back. This is my friend Jamil Zaki, a professor of psychology at Stanford University.

Jamil has just written an important new book called The War for Kindness Building Empathy in a Fractured World that used to be called Choosing Empathy, which now is the title of one of the chapters.

I started writing it in 2015 and I don't know, around late 2016, early 2017, I can't quite put my finger on what it was, but something changed in our in our culture. I felt like things were getting. Crueler and less connected, and people were getting really exhausted with trying to connect with each other and really embracing social division in a way that I hadn't seen in my adult life. I felt like I was being a Pollyanna, just writing this kind of positive, hey, you know, you can choose empathy to when all around me it seemed like this giant tire fire, people just hated each other more than ever.

And it felt to me like I needed and wanted to acknowledge that to be empathic, to choose empathy. Is a radical choice in today's culture. It is a fight against other forces that are pushing us in the opposite direction. Jameel wants us to get pissed off at the current polarized state of society and to take up arms for a coming battle. But his war doesn't involve weapons or the usual inter-group bloodshed. Jameel wants us to fight divisiveness and our ever increasing sense of disconnection.

He wants each and every one of us to commit to being kinder to one another. If you've paid any attention to the news in the last few years, you understand that Jamil's war for kindness is becoming more and more of an uphill battle. A growing body of work shows the empathy in general seems to be decreasing over time. One study presented people with a series of statements and asked them how well it described them on a scale from one not at all to five fits you perfectly.

The statements were things like I often have tender concern, feelings for people who are less fortunate than me. And when I'm upset at someone, I usually try to put myself in their shoes for a while.

And what they found was that in 1979, the average American scored like a four out of five, which sounds not terrible to be.

But by 2009, the average American dropped down to a three point five out of five.

So to put that in perspective, the average American in 2009 less empathic by this measure than 75 percent of Americans just 30 years before this rising level of disconnection means that more and more of us are missing out on a potential boost to our well-being.

It's surprising to a lot of people that empathy is good for us. The empathize or right. We typically think of it almost like a transfer, like I give up my money or time or emotional piece in order to help you have more of it. It's sort of the quintessential act of self-sacrifice. It turns out, though, that the data point almost exactly in the opposite direction, that caring for others is one of the most important ways we can care for ourselves.

People who experience a lot of empathy also tend to be happier, less stressed, and experience less depression. They find it easier to make new friends and to maintain important relationships like their marriages. Seventh graders who are able to understand what others feel are also better able to survive seventh grade, which is not easy.

If my recollection serves the false intuition that empathic work reduces, our happiness is hard to shake. Jamil's saw this himself when he taught a class at Stanford called Becoming Kinder.

So every weekend I would give students these kindness challenges, these little practical assignments meant to help push them to empathize more. And one of the very first ones that we did was spend on someone else. So in a moment, when you don't feel like you have enough time or energy for yourself, do the thing that doesn't come naturally to you and help someone else instead. And the students were really worried about this because it was midterm season. It feels like it's all this midterm season.

It's always better to see that it's somehow always midterms. Is it? But they were freaked out.

They were overwhelmed and they thought, gosh, I don't have the time to do stuff for other people. And reliably, they came back from that challenge feeling like I was shocked because after I helped someone else, I didn't feel depleted. I felt energized.

I kind of felt like if I can do for someone else, then I must be doing OK myself when we don't take actions that could make the people around us feel better, when we don't check in with friends or notice of a coworker is in pain or stopped at a stranger, that means we're each contributing to that type of fire culture Jamil talked about earlier. But Jamil's work shows that doesn't have to be the case.

Another trick that our minds play on us and that our culture plays on us is convincing us that we can't change. Or I think there's this big stereotype that some people are empathic, some people are not. And whatever level of empathy you have, it's like your adult height or your eye color. You'll have it for life. But I think that the evidence actually, again, point in the opposite direction. There are things we can do to push back.

I mean, the fact that empathy has declined so much in the last thirty years means that it's malleable. Things that go down can come up. And I think that one of the first things that I want people to understand is that empathy is under our control more than we realize.

There are specific strategies each of us can use today to increase our empathy and not just in a parochial way where we extend kindness only to the people who are like us. The science says we can turn up compassion to fight the dangerous inter-group empathy gaps that plague our culture and that we may even be able to use some of these strategies to start reducing the biggest and most painful divides in society. We'll examine all these exciting possibilities when the happiness lab returns in a moment.

Hey there, I'm Ashleigh Ford, host of the Chronicles of Now podcast Chronicles of Now commissions, amazing authors like Roxane Gay, Colum McCann, Carmen Maria Machado and Curtis Sittenfeld to write short fiction inspired by the headlines.

Each episode features a new work of fiction inspired by the biggest stories of our time, like what does covid-19 do to our relationships? How do we make sense of climate change and extinction? And perhaps most mysteriously, what is going on with Trump's tweets?

Because in such uncertain times, sometimes art fiction is the only way to make sense of it all.

The show is great for fans of short speculative fiction, historical novels, podcasts that go behind the news and narrative shows like Radiolab and The Moth. The Chronicles of Narnia is imaginative storytelling at its most compelling author's helping us understand our world. Subscribe and Apple podcast or wherever you listen brought to you by Pushkin Industries.

It turns out that, in fact, empathy is like a skill and there are lots of things that we can do to cultivate empathy in ourselves and others. When Jameel taught his becoming kind of class, he gave his students a super hard assignment and empathy challenge he christened disagreeing bellow.

And welcome back, everybody. You can check out a version on his website, find someone with whom you have an ideological difference of opinion.

But then instead of yelling at each other, we're judging each other or even debating. I want you to try to cultivate curiosity about each other. Ask this person how they came to have their opinion in the first place and share with them the story of how you came to have your opinion in the first place, students embarked on hard conversations with racist Facebook, posting uncles and frank discussions about sexuality with their less than progressive parents.

They predicted that these exchanges would end in frustration or even tears. But in nearly all cases, those stories sharing conversations went better than expected.

When you start with narratives, instead of either calling people out or saying how wrong they are, you get to a new type of discussion right away, one in which it actually doesn't matter as much if you would agree on every point. But something just as important or maybe even more important happens, which is that they grow to appreciate that people they disagree with. Are not necessarily bad people. They're just people with different stories than their own. No one owes anyone empathy, especially if they're expressing bigoted viewpoints.

But Jamil says his students were still surprisingly grateful for having been given the challenge because it taught them that making connections across seemingly unbridgeable divides is actually possible. But you might be saying this is just an anecdote from one college class of students talking to their family members. Is there scientific evidence that sharing stories and empathic work like this really does the job? Can connecting over shared experiences actually reduce the inter-group disconnection we see all over the world?

Did you vote to allow gay and lesbian couples to continue to marry or did you vote to ban gay and lesbian couples from being able to marry, saying I didn't do. You didn't vote? The typical political canvassing involves knocking on someone's door and launching into a one way conversation filled with facts, figures and strong arguments. This style of canvassing doesn't really work, especially when the usual political partisanship tightens its grip.

My name is Josh Kalar. I'm an assistant professor of political science and data science at Yale University. People just tune it out. They won't engage, they won't pay attention or they'll argue against it. Most people are just such consistently Democrat or such consistently Republican. There's often not much room to to change someone's mind there.

But Josh and his colleagues have begun studying the effectiveness of a new kind of canvassing, one that can break down her inter-group blinders and one that also employs a lot of the same empathic practices that Jamile and his students used in that disagreeing better assignment.

Deep canvassing is a longer form of canvassing that really involves sharing personal narratives about an issue that often involves a canvasser sharing a moment in their life that is somehow relevant to the issue that's being studied. I'm a gay guy.

I doubt that totally shocks you. And I was in a relationship for 18 years.

Often the stories then prompt the voter to share their own story.

When my wife died or whatever it broke, my heart didn't break my heart, put a hole in it and it won't heal. Yeah, it sounds like marriage is incredibly important to you. I was married forty seven years, so she passed away.

But what we find is that by talking through these stories, the the type of discrimination that we're trying to reduce becomes much more concrete. And it also reduces a lot of fears that the voter has towards that group. It helps them understand what does this word transgender actually mean or what does this word undocumented immigrant actually mean by walking through the life of an undocumented immigrant or transgender person through here in their story? Hearing the canvassers stories tends to shut off the indifference we typically feel for people outside our tribe, deep canvassing also forces the listener to see people from unfamiliar groups and with unfamiliar views as people.

And that empathic boost allows deep canvassers to do something that billions of dollars of political ads can't. They actually change people's minds about controversial political issues?

You know, this issue is going to come up for a vote again in the future. I would vote for this district, vote in favor of allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry.

Josh is careful. Field research has found that deep canvassing gets about five to seven new supporters for every hundred people they talk to.

Now, that may not sound like much, but for ballot measures that are typically won or lost by less than five percentage points, deep canvassing can make or break the adoption of a progressive new law. But what's most impressive about Josh is deep canvassing findings is that these persuasion effects last a long, long time. Well, keep doing this.

Follow up surveys two or three, four or five months later. And typically we run out of money to run more surveys before the effects dissipate.

But aside from the politics, Josh has also seen how powerful deep canvassing can be and empathically connecting people from different identities. One of his favorite examples comes from an encounter in Florida during a campaign for trans rights.

He was a transgender canvasser and he shows up to a house that has a big American flag and a pickup truck.

And he he's really bracing himself for what he expects to be a really difficult conversation. The canvasser shared his story anyway.

He described the kinds of prejudice and misunderstanding he faces on a near daily basis. He even shared a story about being made fun of and called an animal on the New York subway. After sharing this story of personal discrimination, he asked the the person he's canvassing, this white Mocho pickup truck driver, an American flag guy. Have you ever faced anything like that? The guy who's canvassing really pauses for a minute and says the experiences that you face of discrimination that you face and people's lack of empathy and understanding, it's.

It's not that different than the experiences that I faced. I served in Afghanistan, I did two tours there. I came back and I had PTSD. People would look at me like I was crazy and they wouldn't understand what was going on. And what I love about that story is it just questions. So many of the assumptions that we all make and shows that, again, if we're patient, if we question the assumptions, if we're vulnerable and try and listen and share our share our experiences, we can be successful at changing minds.

Jamil is a huge fan of Josh's deep canvasing work because it provides a wonderful example of the central claim in his War Freakiness book that empathy is a skill we can build over time, a tool we can use to do some amazing things if and when we have the bandwidth to use it. I think our culture right now includes a lot of threat at home, online, outside. We're constantly feel as though there are people who threaten our identity, who threaten our way of life, who threaten our beliefs.

And I'm not going to say that that's untrue, and although it's easy and natural to engage in, I guess, what you'd call call-out culture, so just sort of attacking people who have you toxic or problematic attitudes. I think the hard but often very productive thing to do is to be the person who takes that first step.

Who lets their guard down and decides to be vulnerable and Jameel himself recognizes just how hard that first step can be, it can be really exhausting to try to empathize with people who are different from us, especially if they have opinions that we might fear or abhor.

Now, I try really hard to be an understanding person, and I truly believe in the importance of Jamil's battle for kindness. But almost every day I see some view online that makes me see red. When people seem to be so hateful, it's really, really hard for me to see them as deserving of my compassion or my emotional energy. I was surprised that the guy who literally wrote the book on empathy got exactly what I was saying. Trust me, I feel that way all the time.

I still remember when The New York Times had this whole very sympathetic portrayal of a family in Illinois that happened to be Nazis. And I remember a detail where they were trying to humanize this family by talking about how they cooked their past. And I just remember thinking, I don't want to hear about your Nazi pastor. I don't want to humanize you. It's exhausting to connect and it's especially exhausting to connect with people who say things that are awful and that don't really deserve a platform.

So I think it's perfectly OK for people to think about what they have, the energy for, what they have the space for. And no one should feel like they're obligated to connect with or empathize with somebody who's saying awful things. Now, no one has to do this. It's not anybody's job. But when we do, it's remarkable how powerful that can be, because sometimes what you realize is that people on the other side are also waiting for a chance to be human.

Despite the uphill battle, Jamil's optimistic that his war for kindness is gaining new recruits.

I've received hundreds of emails that are something along the lines of I am so fed up with this culture of division, I want more empathy in the world, but I'm the only one. And I was like, can I put you all in a group chat or something like so many of you? And I think we often feel alone, like we are the only ones swimming upstream against a culture of hatred and division and isolation. But I think it's really shocking how powerful it can be to take the first step to be that change instead of waiting for it, because when we take a step towards listening to others, towards being vulnerable with them, oftentimes we find that they're ready to do the same thing.

And I think that if each one of us does that, that can change our lives and it can change the lives of people around us, maybe even save lives. The thing that really inspires me is what could happen if a lot of us did, if most of us did that, because then we wouldn't be changing lives one at a time, we'd have the chance to actually change our entire culture. I try to be an optimistic person, but right now in twenty 2020, the idea that our entire culture will change for the better seems a pretty distant hope.

So much about how our institutions work seems to be wrong. And the flaws in these systems lead to prejudice, cruelty and injustice. And lots of people don't seem to realize that the burden of all these awful things continues to hurt some marginalized groups more than others. Seeing all this makes me really sad and angry at the groups I feel are responsible. I hate the injustice, I hate the divisions, and I hate the heat. Even on my best days, it's hard not to lose hope that I personally can make any difference in these historic problems, but I don't want to just retreat to my group.

And I don't want to empathize with only people who are exactly like me, nor gloat at the pain and misfortune of those who hold different views or who've lived different lives. So I'm now committing to trying to follow Jamil's advice. I'm going to remember that the science shows my intuitions are wrong, that if I try to take the first step and put my guard down, at least in those cases where I have the emotional bandwidth to do so, it might be more effective than I think.

Rather than only seeing someone as a member of an identity I disagree with, I'll try to connect a bit better. I'll ask people to share their stories and if they'll listen, I'll share my own. But like Jameel, I also want to make sure that all this empathic labor is a bit more evenly distributed, that the hard work of deep connection doesn't just fall to historically marginalized groups who've long been on the receiving side of all the injustice. These are the folks who are least likely to have the needed emotional bandwidth to make connections.

I also want to make sure that we're distributing the work of correcting these injustices a little more fairly and that the blind spots of our mind don't prevent well-intentioned people like me from inadvertently making all those structural inequalities worse.

And so when the happiness lab returns, next time, we'll tackle all these issues directly in our next episode, How to Be a Better Ally. We'll hear what science says about how you can fight the structures that lead to some of society's worst injustices and how the lives of our minds sometimes cause good people to unknowingly make things worse. We'll also see that using evidence based strategies for becoming a better ally can not only boost your own personal wellbeing, but more importantly, can make us more effective in contributing positively to the causes we care about most.

And so I hope you'll return next week to hear the final season. Two episode of The Happiness Lab would be Dr. Larry Saito's. The Happiness Lab is Coreign and produced by Ryan Dile, our original music was composed by Zachary Silver with additional scoring, mixing and mastering by Evan Viola Peter and also help with production.

Joseph Fridmann checked our facts and our editing was done by Sophie Krein McKibbon special thanks to McLibel, Kali Migliori Heather Fain, Julia Berten, Maggie Taylor, Maya Koening, Jacob Weisberg and my agent Ben Davis. The Happiness Lab is brought to you by Pushkin Industries and ME documentary centers.