The following is an interview conducted by Archbridge Vice President of Research and Director of the Human Flourishing Lab Clay Routledge with Athena Aktipis, a psychologist who studies cooperation. We discuss her latest book, A Field Guide to the Apocalypse, and what it reveals about the human capacity for cooperation, curiosity, and progress during “wild times.”
Clay Routledge: Before exploring your latest book, A Field Guide to the Apocalypse, I’d like to discuss your diverse research interests and related media endeavors. As a psychology professor at Arizona State University, your research encompasses a wide range of topics, from human generosity to cancer biology. You also co-direct the Cooperation Science Network and Human Generosity Project, founded Zombified Media, and host the Zombified podcast. Is there an underlying thread that connects these scholarly pursuits and creative projects?
Athena Aktipis: First of all, thanks so much for the invitation to talk about my work and my new book! Yes, there are definitely a few threads that tie it all together. The most central is cooperation—and its flip side, conflict. I study cooperation across many systems and scales: from the cells in our bodies working together to make us functional multicellular beings, to how people around the world help each other through tough times. Conflict is the other side of that coin—understanding when and why exploitation arises, how organisms zombify one another for their own ends, and how to manage conflict so cooperation can still thrive. That interplay between cooperation and conflict is really the thread running through much of what I do.
Clay: What inspired you to write a book about surviving the apocalypse?
Athena: A Field Guide to the Apocalypse grew out of my fieldwork with The Human Generosity Project, which I’ve been co-directing with anthropologist Lee Cronk for over a decade. We’ve done fieldwork around the world, lab studies with thousands of participants, and built computational models to understand how people help each other during hard times. What we found is that people reliably help in times of crisis—especially when those crises are unpredictable and uncontrollable, like natural disasters or droughts—without expecting payback.
We call this need-based helping: people ask for help only if they genuinely need it, and give help if they can do so without falling below their own needs. Given all the uncertainty and instability we’re facing now, I wanted to share the hopeful message that we’re wired for resilience, and that we can get through hard times by leaning into cooperation.
Clay: When most people think about the apocalypse, they likely envision a globally cataclysmic event that ends most or all human life. How do you define or conceptualize the apocalypse in your work?
Athena: A lot of people do think of the apocalypse as the literal end of the world, but I take inspiration from the original Greek meaning: a revelation, an uncovering of deeper truths. An apocalypse doesn’t have to be a global cataclysm—it might just be the end of the world as we know it. In that sense, apocalypses are moments of reckoning that force us to confront our assumptions and adapt. These moments—however difficult—can reveal hidden realities, clarify our values, and push us to grow. Trying to go back to “normal” after an apocalypse misses the point. Instead, we can use the disruption to expand our skills, our thinking, and our social networks. That shift in mindset makes us more prepared, more adaptable, and less afraid of the unknown.
Clay: Your book offers a unique perspective that I think is important for discussions on human progress and flourishing. Using an evolutionary biology and psychology approach, you argue that humans are adapted for the apocalypse. What do you mean by that, and how might understanding this evolutionary framework help people navigate contemporary challenges and develop a more hopeful, agentic relationship with the future?
Athena: Thanks, Clay. I’ve tried to take my research in evolution and behavior and use it to help us understand how we can better face the challenges of our time. Humans evolved in volatile environments—changing climates, shifting resources, unexpected threats. And we didn’t just survive; we adapted both evolutionarily and culturally. We evolved the capacity to cooperate under stress, to communicate complex ideas, to coordinate in large groups. We’re also creative, playful, and innovative, traits that are incredibly useful when navigating uncertainty.
Clay: What are the key characteristics that make humans adapted for apocalyptic conditions?
Athena: Our adaptability comes from a whole suite of traits. Innovation, creativity, and play help us generate new solutions when the world shifts. Our ancestors faced enormous environmental variability—and this led to what’s called “variability selection”— which selected for flexibility rather than narrow specialization. Most species evolve to fit a particular niche. We evolved to create and adapt to new niches— the cognitive niche, as Tooby and DeVore put it. That means cooperation, learning, language, simulation of possible futures, and, yes, a willingness to f*** around and find out.
We also evolved to enjoy it—to have a sense of adventure. Horror and apocalyptic fiction tap into that: they let us explore danger safely. And our flexible mating systems also show this adaptability. In some resource-scarce environments or those with lots of intergroup conflict, polyandry or partible paternity systems emerge, which help ensure the survival of offspring and continuity of lineages. My colleague Michael Gurven’s work shows that humans likely lost about 20% of their social group to catastrophic events during our evolutionary history. But we rebounded—biologically, socially, and culturally. That’s apocalypse-adaptedness in action.
Clay: If people embrace the mindset that the future is bleak and humanity is destined for self-destruction, they’re unlikely to feel motivated to engage in efforts that could help build a better future. Are you concerned about the prevalence of this kind of apocalyptic thinking in contemporary discourse, and what strategies do you think might help shift this mindset towards something more constructive?
Athena: Apocalyptic thinking can be dangerous when it leads to hopelessness and paralysis. But we can flip it on its head. Instead of dreading the end, we can treat the apocalypse as a catalyst for transformation. If we assume the world is doomed, we’ll stop trying. But if we approach our changing world with curiosity and urgency, there’s so much we can do. Rather than doomscrolling in isolation, we can learn new skills, strengthen our relationships, and build resilience.
A little prepping helps too—not just the bunker-and-beans kind, but what I call “apocalypse casual.” Have a go-bag, a shelter-in-place kit, and a car kit. That’s not paranoia—that’s just smart risk management. It makes you more ready to help others, too. Prepping can actually be empowering.
Clay: Risk management is certainly important. We need to think about and prepare for threats. But humans don’t just seek security. We also want growth and improvement. Progress involves taking risks through exploration, experimentation, and innovation. Beyond helping us manage apocalyptic and other kinds of risks, how can evolutionary biology and psychology guide us in pursuing the kind of risk-taking that improves our lives and advances civilization?
Athena: I love this question. I think the key insight is that safety and risk-taking aren’t opposites—they’re intertwined. To be truly safe, we have to learn, and learning requires risk. Think about a gazelle: if it never learns about lions because it avoids them completely, it may be more vulnerable in a surprise attack than a gazelle that’s observed and understood the threat.
The same goes for us. If we avoid everything that scares us, we don’t build the skills we need to cope with actual danger. And we miss out on opportunities. The gazelle that learns to safely read a lion’s behavior might be able to graze nearby and gain resources that others miss. Likewise, we benefit from smart risk-taking that helps us better understand the world and ourselves. This is the heart of morbid curiosity—it helps keep us alive.
Clay: Many progress advocates argue that science fiction entertainment has become too apocalyptic. They worry these dark visions fuel pessimism and declinism, calling for more optimistic future stories to inspire progress-oriented thinking. I agree we need positive visions, but I also think darker content serves important psychological functions. Coltan Scrivner’s work on morbid curiosity demonstrates this well. What is your view on the psychological function of fiction, especially science fiction that shows us both dark and hopeful possible futures?
Athena: I completely agree! Even dark visions can motivate action. Apocalyptic fiction is a safe way to explore scary futures. It lets us pay shared attention to possible threats and practice imagining responses. Fiction lowers our defenses and lets us engage with uncomfortable ideas.
It also helps with coordination. If we all see the same risks in a story, we’re more likely to be able to cooperate in addressing them in real life. Stories can be a way to simulate futures together. They activate our cooperative, communicative, and imaginative capacities—all key to navigating uncertainty.
Clay: Is there anything else you’ve discovered in your research that you think could be particularly valuable for promoting human flourishing?
Athena: One big takeaway is that we’re better at handling hard times than we think—and that people really do help each other when it counts. Relationships built in adversity create lasting trust and safety. But it’s also important to have a shared sense of what constitutes real need.
That’s why I like to go back to the basics: Shelter, Water, Fire (as in thermoregulation), Food—ShWaFiFo, if you like mnemonics. These are our core needs. Practicing meeting them—by going camping, backpacking, or just preparing your home—builds confidence.
And we need other people, especially people who see the world differently. We grow by connecting across divides: politically, culturally, and experientially. People who challenge us also help us become more resilient and adventurous. With strong networks and an openness to challenge, we can not only survive but truly thrive in uncertain times.
Clay: Thanks for sharing your insights with us. Where can our readers go to learn more about your work?
Athena: Thanks again for having me! You can find me at www.athenaaktipis.org. My podcast Zombified is all about the things that hijack our brains—from parasites to social media—and it’s at www.zombified.org and on all major podcast platforms. My book websites have more resources: A Field Guide to the Apocalypse and The Cheating Cell. And if you want to follow my adventures online, I’m @AthenaAktipis on all the platforms. Stay tuned for my next book, Hijacked, which explores how we get taken over—and how we can take back control.
