 a key point you make in the book is that if we look across cultures, this pattern of monogamy is clear. So I know all of us are bringing a cultural context to this conversation, and that cultural context could be religious influence based on the way we are raised, the communities we're a part of, you mentioned another culture, the elites, but I just want to point out that what is clear in the science is this pattern of monogamy in humans is prevalent across all cultures. Religion builds morality upon monogamy and the nuclear family in a lot of different instances of different religions completely. So there is a signal that is present in human nature that science is measuring across all of these cultures that leads to this conclusion of monogamy. Yeah, I think it's one of our great social achievements as a human race. Biologists tell us that our closest relatives biologically are chimpanzees, and chimpanzees basically have sex indiscriminately. And so some of the people point to that and say, we're just kind of like more advanced chimpanzees. One of the things that we often don't recognize, how good we have it as human beings, do either of you have just to guess if we applied our notion of say domestic violence to chimpanzees? Do you have any estimate or guess at what proportion of female chimpanzees at some point in their lives experience what we would frame as domestic violence? Nearly 100. Yeah, 100%. And I would say that those are linked. And a lot of times violence is used by males to control reproduction and reproductive access and so forth. And again, I totally agree with you, AJ, that we do have a deep capacity for monogamy and what anthropologists would call long-term pair bonding. We also have a capacity to not to kind of disregard that. I think it doesn't take long to look around the tabloids and see examples where people are behaving in other ways. It's obviously a sensitive issue. I think it's going to be good for society. It's going to be good for children. It's going to be good for women if we can continue on this road toward monogamy. It's not easy, especially with some of the cultural changes that have happened in the last decades, at least in the West. But I think it's a fight worth continuing. In a sense, it requires us to overcome a deep kind of propensity within human nature. To bring it home and to get back to this idea of what actually is the purpose of existence, to me, it seems that the way that nature has shaped us leaves us pulled in these different directions. We have these differing capacities within us. And when you combine this, again, my conclusion is that on some level, we have this ability to choose free will. To me, it seems like life is a test, that we have to choose between these competing impulses within us. And it seems at least on some level that life is a test. We've had on Dr. Robert Waldinger to talk about the Harvard Adult Developmental Study, and I know that's a key chapter in the book. So I'd love to segue into how does this look from purpose from a personal level, but then also what is this good for society level that is linked, obviously, into human nature, because it's clear through all of this that we have thrived as humans in civilizations. It's not been on our own, completely isolated, and it's not been in small tribes trying to fight off woolly mammoths and saber-toothed tigers. We've been able to survive and strengthen in forming civilizations. And a lot of this meaning and purpose is tied to the human nature around creating these civilizations. Yeah. And also at a fundamental level are immediate social groups. When you ask people what is most meaningful about life in these large series that, say, the Pew Foundation does, and you give them a blank answer so it's not necessarily multiple choice. They just can write whatever they want. Most people list in some form their personal relationships. And I think that is revealing. As you've noted, a lot of people will just say, well, should I just work as hard as I can, give as much money as I can? And there are some cognitive illusions that nature has in a sneaky way built within us, because we're not good at one of the psychological principles that is really interesting is this notion of affective forecasting. That is the ability to predict how we're going to feel in a given situation. And what that means by extension is that we're not great at predicting what's going to make us happy. Let me qualify it a little bit because we're mostly good at predicting whether a situation is going to help us to feel positive or negative emotions. But the intensity and the duration of those emotions were not great at. So this was driven home by an influential study in the 1970s with the provocative title of lottery winners and accident victims, where researchers, they went and they assessed these two very different groups of people, ones that had suffered terrible accidents that left them quadriplegic or paraplegic, and the other group, those who had won the lottery. This wasn't immediately after the event of interest, but some time. And so if I ask you, would you rather win the lottery or suffer an accident? You say, well, of course I'm going to win the lottery because my happiness is going to be better. But in terms of the ability of these two different groups of people to enjoy everyday things, there wasn't really any difference. And that is because of a related principle called hedonic adaptation, this notion that for a lot of things, after a period of time, our kind of happiness set point goes back to where it was. And that's certainly the case with things like money, getting a promotion, that sort of thing, is yeah, they make us feel better for a period, but then we kind of settle back in. In a way, there's a good part about this because it also means that we can adjust in the other way, and that if we go through some sort of adversity, that we can adapt and prove resilient and adjust to difficult circumstances. So it's not all bad, but there is a kind of a maddening aspect to it that depicts us almost as like hamsters running on this happiness treadmill. But the key exception is relationships. And again, for good and for bad, a positive, warm, intimate relationship can really increase our happiness set point, whereas a toxic one, you don't really adapt to that. Toxic relationships kind of have this enduring negative impact on well-being.