Science
Cynicism is everywhere and it’s making us sick. Is this the antidote?
If you feel certain your preferred candidate will lose the presidential election, that AI is coming for your job or that climate change is going to destroy humanity, then you have fallen prey to a cynical mindset, and you’re far from alone.
Over the past 50 years, cynicism has spread like a virus across American society, infecting us with the belief that other people can’t be trusted, the world is only getting worse and there’s nothing we can do about it. This potent mix of fatalism and hopelessness has led to a loss of faith in our neighbors, our institutions and our dreams for the future.
Shelf Help is a wellness column where we interview researchers, thinkers and writers about their latest books — all with the aim of learning how to live a more complete life.
In 1972, 46% of Americans agreed that most people can be trusted according to the General Social Survey. By 2018, that percentage had fallen to 31.9%. This rise in collective cynicism is not just destroying our hope, it’s also affecting our health. Studies suggest that cynics suffer more depression, drink more heavily, earn less money and die younger than non-cynics.
But there may be an antidote to the cynical epidemic. In his new book “Hope for Cynics: The surprising science of human goodness,” (Grand Central) Stanford professor Jamil Zaki suggests that cynicism can be combated with a willingness to question our most cynical assumptions and corroborate them with facts.
If we would only look at the data, he writes, most of us would discover that people are more worthy of our trust than we imagine, that we have more in common with our political rivals than we think and that many of the problems we believe to be intractable may have solutions after all. He advocates for what he calls hopeful skepticism: Acknowledging that the future is mysterious, and we can’t know what will happen.
Being hopeful is not a matter of looking away, it’s a matter of looking more closely and more clearly.
— Jamil Zaki, author of “Hope for Cynics”
“There’s this idea that being hopeful is like putting on a pair of rose-colored glasses,” Zaki, who has spent 20 years studying kindness, connection and empathy said in an interview. “It turns out that most of us are wearing mud-colored glasses already. Being hopeful is not a matter of looking away, it’s a matter of looking more closely and more clearly.”
Here Zaki talks about the media’s role in creating a more cynical society, why so many of us mistake cynicism for wisdom and why trusting others isn’t only for the privileged among us.
Author Jamil Zaki. Photo by Vern Evans
(Photo by Vern Evans)
How do you define cynicism?
I’m using a purposefully modern psychological definition: the theory that most people at our core are selfish, greedy and dishonest. That’s not to say that a cynic would be shocked if somebody donated to charity or helped a stranger, but they might suspect or impugn the person’s motives. They might say, “Yeah they donate to charity for a tax break, or to look good in front of other people.” So it’s a theory not about human action, but about human motivation.
How does cynicism relate to trust?
Cynicism relates very strongly and very negatively to trust. Trust is our willingness to be vulnerable to somebody else on the expectation that that person will honor your vulnerability. It’s loaning money to somebody because you think they’ll pay you back. It’s confiding in a friend because you think they’ll support you. It’s leaving your kids with a babysitter because you think they’ll care for the children. In all of these cases trust requires a bet on another person. It’s a social risk and cynics think that bet is for suckers. They don’t trust in a variety of contexts, whether it’s strangers, politicians or even family and friends, the way less cynical people do.
“Hope for Cynics” by Jamil Zaki. (Grand Central)
(Grand Central)
You write that people often mistake cynicism for wisdom. Why is that?
Cynicism has the veneer of wisdom and people view it as a form of intelligence and a sign of experience. It turns out that if you look at the data cynicism is shockingly naive and much more similar to gullible trust than people realize. But cynics act like they know things and it turns out that acting like you know things is a great way to get people to believe you know things. So cynicism is somewhat rewarding to people in that it looks like wisdom. You are treated as a wise person if you are just very grim about everything.
Why did cynicism skyrocket in the past 50 years?
Two things come to mind. The first is inequality. Nations, states and counties that are more economically unequal are poisonous for trust, and the U.S. has become much more unequal in the 50 years when we lost faith in each other. Interestingly, unequal times are not only characterized by low trust among people with less means, but even wealthier people in unequal places are less trusting than well-heeled people in more equal places. Inequality puts us all in a zero-sum mindset where there is not enough to go around and whatever you get, I lose. When you’re in that frame of mind, it’s very easy to have mistrust as your default.
The second source we see is the media. People have something in our minds called negativity bias. We focus more on threatening information than on pleasant information. This ancient bias has been combined with a hyper-modern media ecosystem that feeds us whatever it takes to keep us clicking, scrolling and watching, which is not the same as information that would make us happy or hopeful, or even information that is accurate. You might think if you watch a lot of news you are more informed but it turns out that in many cases you are less informed. For example, people who watch lots of news believe that violent crime is on the rise, even when it’s on the decline.
Your book suggests that skepticism — not optimism — is the best antidote for cynicism. Why?
Cynicism and skepticism are often confused with one another but they are actually quite different. You can think of a cynic as a lawyer in the prosecution against humanity. They pick up on any and all evidence about human evil and conniving and explain away or ignore evidence of positive human qualities. Optimists, or naive trusters, think like lawyers as well but they are hyper-focused on any sign of human goodness and ignore any sign of harmful behavior. Skeptics think more like scientists. They don’t have blanket judgments about people that they default to. Instead, they try to evaluate the evidence whenever they find themselves with a new person or in a new situation. Because of that skepticism, often confused for cynicism, can be a great antidote for it.
In the summer of 2022 you invited Americans to join 20-minute Zoom calls with political rivals to discuss gun control, climate change and abortion. What did people learn about each other from those conversations?
If you look at the evidence there is incredible amounts of common ground even between Democrats and Republicans that most Americans don’t know about. So, what did people learn in these 20 minute conversations? One: that a randomly selected member of the other side is much more reasonable, much more open-minded and much less hostile than they imagined an outsider or rival to be. [Two], when they talked about issues they learned that they did have some common ground, and this immensely deescalated their outrage and hatred toward the other other side. Because now they were thinking of the real other side instead of the image we have in our mind.
I’ve often wondered if the ability to trust others is a sign of privilege. Depending on our race, class, gender and educational background some of us are more likely to be treated with respect and empathy than others. Where do you land on that?
It’s very easy to draw the conclusion that hope is a form of privilege and maybe even toxic — that it causes us to ignore our problems, or rather, ignore problems that we don’t have but other people do have. You might be surprised then, to find out that some of the least trusting and most cynical people are the ones with privilege and money and power. And actually, people who struggle in terms of their socioeconomic status tend to be more interdependent and reliant on trust. I realize I’m a bit of a broken record here, but one of the amazing things about doing the many thousands of hours of research for this book is that over and over again I found out that our assumptions aren’t just wrong, they are the exact opposite of right.
TAKEAWAYS
from “Hope for Cynics”
Do you think American society is capable of reversing our descent into cynicism?
I do think we’re capable of it, and one reason I think that is we’ve done it before. The 1890s and 1900s were a terrible time for social life in the United States. There was extreme mistrust, extreme polarization, backsliding on issues like race, the rise of Jim Crow laws. It was a horrible time culturally in all these different ways and that pain spurred what is called the progressive movement in the first couple of decades of the 20th century. There was all this labor organizing and social groups and movements that agitated from everything from public kindergarten to women’s suffrage to the FDA and the Parks Service. There was this sense of responsibility to one another. This growing value of connection. Could that happen again? Yeah, it could. Will it happen again? I have no idea.
What can we do as individuals to shift this trend?
There’s a few things. The first is to be more skeptical — to fact check our cynical feelings. I do this all the time. When I see myself suspecting people I try my best to to say, “You’re a scientist what evidence do you have for that claim?” And oftentimes the answer is, “I have no evidence to support this bleak assumption.” Once we have that mindset of being more curious about our own thoughts we can interrupt the cycle of cynicism.
A second thing we can do is take more social risks. Because of negativity bias, we miscalculate the upsides and downsides of social life. We overestimate how likely it is that if we trust someone they will betray us and we underestimate the likelihood that things will go well. So I try to recalibrate and say, “Based on the actual data of what people are like, I should probably trust them more.” Earnest Hemingway said that the best way to find out if you can trust somebody is to trust them. I think he’s right, but it’s also true that when you trust people you bring out their best. So you don’t just learn about them, you change them. I try to give people many more opportunities than I used to to show me who they are, and often times they show me something really great.
Shelf Help is a wellness column where we interview researchers, thinkers and writers about their latest books — all with the aim of learning how to live a more complete life. Want to pitch us? Email alyssa.bereznak@latimes.com.
Our universe might be chock-full of cosmic wonder, but you can observe only a fraction of astronomical phenomena with the naked eye. Meteor showers, natural fireworks that streak brightly across the night sky, are one of them.
The latest observable meteor shower will be the Lyrids, which has been active since April 14 and is forecast to continue through April 30. The shower reaches its peak April 21 to 22, or Tuesday night into Wednesday morning.
According to NASA, the Lyrids are one of the oldest known meteor showers, and have been enjoyed by stargazers for nearly 3,000 years. Their bright, speedy streaks are caused by the dusty debris from a comet named Thatcher. They appear to spring from the constellation Lyra, which right now can be seen in the eastern sky at night in the Northern Hemisphere.
The moon will be about 27 percent full tonight, appearing as a thick crescent in the sky, according to the American Meteor Society.
To get a hint at when to best watch for the Lyrids, you can use this tool, which relies on data from the Global Meteor Network. It shows fireball activity levels in real time.
And while you gaze at the heavens, keep an eye out for other stray meteors streaking across the night sky. Skywatchers are reporting that the amount of fireballs is double what is usually seen by this point in the year.
Where meteor showers come from
There is a chance you might see a meteor on any given night, but you are most likely to catch one during a shower. Meteor showers are caused by Earth passing through the rubble trailing a comet or asteroid as it swings around the sun. This debris, which can be as small as a grain of sand, leaves behind a glowing stream of light as it burns up in Earth’s atmosphere.
Meteor showers occur around the same time every year and can last for days or weeks. But there is only a small window when each shower is at its peak, which happens when Earth reaches the densest part of the cosmic debris. The peak is the best time to look for a shower. From our point of view on Earth, the meteors will appear to come from the same point in the sky.
The Perseid meteor shower, for example, peaks in mid-August from the constellation Perseus. The Geminids, which occur every December, radiate from the constellation Gemini.
How to watch a meteor shower
Michelle Nichols, the director of public observing at the Adler Planetarium in Chicago, recommends forgoing the use of telescopes or binoculars while watching a meteor shower.
“You just need your eyes and, ideally, a dark sky,” she said.
That’s because meteors can shoot across large swaths of the sky, so observing equipment can limit your field of view.
Some showers are strong enough to produce up to 100 streaks an hour, according to the American Meteor Society, though you probably won’t see that many.
“Almost everybody is under a light-polluted sky,” Ms. Nichols said. “You may think you’re under a dark sky, but in reality, even in a small town, you can have bright lights nearby.”
Planetariums, local astronomy clubs or even maps like this one can help you figure out where to go to escape excessive light. The best conditions for catching a meteor shower are a clear sky with no moon or cloud cover, sometime between midnight and sunrise. (Moonlight affects visibility in the same way as light pollution, washing out fainter sources of light in the sky.) Make sure to give your eyes at least 30 minutes to adjust to seeing in the dark.
Ms. Nichols also recommends wearing layers, even during the summer. “You’re going to be sitting there for quite a while, watching,” she said. “It’s going to get chilly, even in August.”
Bring a cup of cocoa or tea for even more warmth. Then lie back, scan the sky and enjoy the show.
Where weather is least likely to affect your view
Storm systems sweep across the country in early spring, and some will be obscuring skies tonight. But there will still be plenty of areas with clear skies, particularly in parts of the central United States.
“The best spot is going to be in the Upper Midwest,” said Rich Bann, a meteorologist with the Weather Prediction Center.
Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa will offer especially good sky-viewing weather and a beach on the Great Lakes could be a nice spot to look up at the stars.
But don’t expect to view the show from Chicago, as Illinois could see some thunderstorms. The weather will be better in the Northern and Central Plains, particularly the eastern Dakotas.
High, wispy clouds are expected over the Ohio and Tennessee Valleys and into parts of the Mid-Atlantic. But, Mr. Bann said, “you may be able to see some shooting stars through thin clouds.”
Clouds will be draped across much of the Southeast and the Northeast, though there could be some clearing in Florida, Georgia, the Carolinas and Virginia. Remember, the meteors could be visible all night long. If you look outside and see clouds, try again later.
Catching the spectacle will be challenging across much of the West, particularly from Washington into Northern California, where a storm system is bringing rain and snow. That system will move east overnight.
There are likely to be some pockets of clear skies at times across southern Nevada, northwest Arizona and southwest Utah, Mr. Bann said.
Amy Graff contributed reporting.
WASHINGTON — Amid growing national security concerns, the FBI said Tuesday that it has launched a broad investigation in the deaths or disappearances of at least 10 scientists and staff connected to highly sensitive research, including four from the Los Angeles area.
“The FBI is spearheading the effort to look for connections into the missing and deceased scientists. We are working with the Department of Energy, Department of War, and with our state and state and local law enforcement partners to find answers,” the agency said in a statement.
The FBI’s announcement comes after the House Oversight Committee announced that it would investigate reports of the disappearance and deaths of the scientists, sending letters seeking information from the agencies involved in the federal inquiry as well as NASA, which owns the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in La Cañada Flintridge, where three of the missing or dead scientists worked.
“If the reports are accurate, these deaths and disappearances may represent a grave threat to U.S. national security and to U.S. personnel with access to scientific secrets,” Reps. James Comer (R-Ky.), chairman of the committee, and Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) wrote in the letters.
President Trump told reporters last week that he had been briefed on the missing and dead scientists, which he described as “pretty serious stuff.” He said at the time that he expected answers on whether the deaths were connected “in the next week and a half.”
Michael David Hicks, who studied comets and asteroids at JPL, was the first of the scientists who disappeared or died. He died on July 30, 2023, at the age of 59. No cause of death was disclosed.
A year later, JPL physicist Frank Maiwald died at 61, with no cause of death disclosed.
Two other Los Angeles scientists are part of the string of deaths and disappearances.
On June 22, 2025, Monica Jacinto Reza, a materials scientist at JPL, disappeared while on a hike near Mt. Waterman in the San Gabriel Mountains.
On Feb. 16, Caltech astrophysicist Carl Grillmair was fatally shot on the porch of his Llano home. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s department arrested Freddy Snyder, 29, in connection with the shooting. Snyder had been arrested in December on suspicion of trespassing on Grillmair’s property.
Snyder has been charged with murder.
There is no evidence at this point that the deaths and disappearances, which occurred over a span of four years, are connected.
A spokesperson for NASA, which owns JPL, said in a statement on X that the agency is “coordinating and cooperating with the relevant agencies in relation to the missing scientists.
“At this time, nothing related to NASA indicates a national security threat,” agency spokesperson Bethany Stevens wrote. “The agency is committed to transparency and will provide more information as able.”
Representatives from Caltech, which manages JPL, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The sun had barely risen over the Pacific Ocean when a small motorboat carrying a team of Indigenous artisans and Mexican biologists dropped anchor in a rocky cove near Bahías de Huatulco.
Mauro Habacuc Avendaño Luis, one of the craftsmen, was the first to wade to shore. With an agility belying his age, he struck out over the boulders exposed by low tide. Crouching on a slippery ledge pounded by surf, he reached inside a crevice between two rocks. There, lodged among the urchins, was a snail with a knobby gray shell the size of a walnut. The sight might not dazzle tourists who travel here to see humpback whales, but for Mr. Avendaño, 85, these drab little mollusks represent a way of life.
Marine snails in the genus Plicopurpura are sacred to the Mixtec people of Pinotepa de Don Luis, a small town in southwestern Oaxaca. Men like Mr. Avendaño have been sustainably “milking” them for radiant purple dye for at least 1,500 years. The color suffuses Mixtec textiles and spiritual beliefs. Called tixinda, it symbolizes fertility and death, as well as mythic ties between lunar cycles, women and the sea.
The future of these traditions — and the fate of the snails — are uncertain. The mollusks are subject to intense poaching pressure despite federal protections intended to protect them. Fishermen break them (and the other mollusks they eat) open and sell the meat to local restaurants. Tourists who comb the beaches pluck snails off the rocks and toss them aside.
A severe earthquake in 2020 thrust formerly submerged parts of their habitat above sea level, fatally tossing other mollusks in the snail’s food web to the air, and making once inaccessible places more available to poachers.
Decades ago, dense clusters of snails the size of doorknobs were easy to find, according to Mr. Avendaño. “Full of snails,” he said, sweeping a calloused, violet-stained hand across the coves. Now, most of the snails he finds are small, just over an inch, and yield only a few milliliters of dye.
-
Kansas3 minutes agoPBS Kansas remembers employee killed in Wichita shooting; estranged husband charged
-
Kentucky9 minutes agoKentucky transfer Collin Chandler speaks out on why he returned to BYU basketball
-
Louisiana15 minutes agoFederal appeals court upholds Texas’ Ten Commandments law. What does it mean for Louisiana?
-
Maine21 minutes agoMaine Republican candidates are upset about their own party’s online poll
-
Maryland27 minutes ago3 men, teen arrested in connection to Maryland car rallies
-
Michigan33 minutes agoHockey roundup: Three Michigan State recruits at U18 worlds; Bruins top Sabres
-
Massachusetts39 minutes agoWrong-way crash closes I-495 southbound in Chelmsford, 1 seriously injured – Boston News, Weather, Sports | WHDH 7News
-
Minnesota45 minutes ago5 tornadoes confirmed in Friday’s outbreak in southeastern Minnesota