 I actually developed a model to help people understand what's going on when we just have sort of automatic reactions. And what I designed is this model I call the three B's. And the three B's are your biology, that's what you're genetically programmed to do in response to certain stimuli. Your biases, which in this case include the emotional reasoning bias, that we believe everything we feel, the confirmation bias that we look for evidence to support what we already think. And the negativity bias, which keeps us looking for any potential threats around us. That's the second B. And then the third B are our beliefs and specifically our beliefs about emotions. All three of these B's are shaping our behavior in any moment and they're trying to help us index for safety, certainty, coherence and comfort. And that is our default mode. That's what pretty much all of us are on some level doing. If we were able to tune in to everyone's most inner world, we would sound a little bit like cave people going, ooh-ga-ooh-ga, me want safety, or ooh-ga-ooh-ga, me want certainty. That's kind of what's at the heart of most of our default reactions. Now that's not always helpful in every context. So this is where we really can imagine an evolutionary upgrade to our emotional coding. Like I say in the book, there's a glitch in our decision-making code when we have on average 35,000 choices a day and 98% of those are actually not authentic choices. Not that every choice has to be authentic, right? I don't want to decide whether or not I have to pee. I wanna just know I have to pee and go pee. I don't wanna do a lot of inquiry around it. That's nice and helpful. But there are times where it's not so obvious what choice is gonna move me. AJ, I think you were suggesting, or Johnny, maybe it was you saying, but we wanna move in the direction that matters to us. So I think comfort, certainty, that resonates, but this cohesion piece, I think our audience might be a little lost on. Do you mean coherence? Coherence, sorry. Yeah, we like things to make sense. It's uncomfortable when we can't make sense of things. So our minds are really meaning-making, problem-solving machines. And again, for good reason, we have to solve problems. If there's a big bear standing in front of us, we have to figure out how to survive that. What's really difficult for us is we have a lot less physical threats now in the time we're living in. But what our mind has done is it's gone from identifying threats as sort of threats to our physical survival to threats to our social survival. So now we tend to read threats as like, what does someone else think about me and how do I think about myself? That's usually what's at stake when we think about navigating threats on a daily basis now. And in our experience, a big part of that is the bias to personalize a lot of the response that we see in others and then have the emotional reaction. So you have someone that you're trying to get to know and they don't respond and immediately you personalize that lack of response to, I did something. They don't like me. They're not gonna want a second date, et cetera, et cetera. When maybe they got in a car accident, maybe it had literally nothing to do with you.