Brené Brown warns American workers are not neurologically wired for this level of rapid change and instability: ‘People are not okay’ 79%

By Emma Burleigh70%

7/12/2026, 12:18:57 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Hasty Generalization, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 57.3% saturation with 417 hits. Analysis detected 2,371 faulty-reasoning hits from 728 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 70.4% and a BS Rank of 79% (4,482 of 20,496 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 78.10% of the article peer group.

American workers are clocking into their jobs in incredibly uncertain times: Economists fear a recession is on the horizon ; the government seemingly imposes new policies every day; and AI continues to automate more human roles . 
This constant change has thrown many lives out of balance—and author, researcher, and professor Brené Brown told Fortune instability wreaks havoc on workers’ mental health. 
“If you’re leading people, you probably know people are not okay,” Brown said onstage during Fortune ‘s Most Powerful Women Summit in Washington, D.C., in October 2025. 
“Folks are still going into Costco with an automatic weapon because they’re out of Cheese Whiz,” she stressed. 
“People are emotionally dysregulated, distrustful, and disconnected.” 
Gen Z and young millennials are missing a day of work every week owing to mental health concerns 
Employees are under intense emotional and financial strain; the typical worker in the U.K. feels unable to work for almost 50 days a year, owing to their mental health struggles. 
And staffers are even willing to make big sacrifices to feel like they’re in a good place—half of American Gen Zers and millennials said they would take a pay cut if their boss helped to better their well-being at work. 
Brown said unstable geopolitics, changing markets, and advanced tech like AI are to blame for Americans’ declining well-being. 
The majority of U.S. staffers said tension has risen at work since the new administration took power. 
Meanwhile, markets have been shaken by trade policies and tariffs, leaving investors and everyday consumers on unsteady ground; and AI automating jobs only adds another layer of anxiety. 
The current state of the world paints a bleak picture for workforces that are “increasingly struggling,” according to Brown. 
“It is extraordinarily difficult to be brave right now for a lot of different reasons. 
Politics is one, but [also] radically changing markets  I’m going to tell you right now, people are not okay.” 
We are wired for certainty, but the road ahead is rocky 
For workers struggling with the current pace of change, Brown said that the solution is certainty—but in reality, that’s becoming harder to find. 
“We are wired for certainty, and we’re wired to get to certainty as soon as possible. 
And the more uncertainty that we’re in, the more really hard feedback we get from our bodies,” Brown continued. 
“We’re not wired for the kind of leadership I think we need right now.” 
Her comments come as tech leaders are divided on what the future holds in an increasingly AI-driven work landscape. 
With more and more roles being automated, Goodwill’s CEO said he’s preparing for an influx of Gen Z workers, since white-collar roles are being snatched up by the tech. 
Other executives like Jeff Bezos predict that AI will enable “millions of people” to live in space, while robots continue to take on more human jobs. 
Microsoft cofounder Bill Gates also sees rapid change ahead , with a two-day workweek possibly on the books owing to efficiency gains from AI. 
“It’s improving at a rate that surprises me,” Gates told CNN in an interview in 2025. 
“AI today can replace human work, the most complex coding tasks, [but] it’s not able to do [it] yet. 
And people in the field disagree: Is that within the next year or two, or is it more like 10 years away?” 
But not all hope is lost—Brown insists when CEOs are aware of the upheaval their staffers are going through, they have the power to navigate the disruption with empathy and trust. 
She said leaders need to sit down with their staff to discuss what best practice looks like within the business, and what the best ways are to work with one another. 
“One [capability] that I think is so lacking today that it’s shocking  is deep, complex understanding of systems theory,” Brown said. 
“If you don’t understand that the world that we’re operating in today is built of systems inextricably connected to other systems, and that if you move one Lego piece an inch over here, you’ve got fallout over here, you’re not going to be able to win.” 
A version of this story was published on Fortune.com on October 21, 2025. 
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 11.7%Emma Burleigh: 5.7%Fortune: 4.2%Confirmation Bias11.7%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 2.5%Fortune: 1.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 18.3%Emma Burleigh: 5.3%Fortune: 3.2%Availability Heuristic18.3%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 1.6%Fortune: 1.4%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.5%Fortune: 1.1%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 13.7%Emma Burleigh: 2.6%Fortune: 2.6%Overconfidence Bias13.7%This article: 4.4%Emma Burleigh: 8.0%Fortune: 6.8%Framing Effect4.4%This article: 5.5%Emma Burleigh: 0.7%Fortune: 0.6%Loss Aversion5.5%This article: 4.3%Emma Burleigh: 0.5%Fortune: 0.6%Status Quo Bias4.3%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.8%Emma Burleigh: 6.0%Fortune: 3.2%Optimism Bias7.8%This article: 19.1%Emma Burleigh: 3.8%Fortune: 2.5%Pessimism Bias19.1%This article: 57.3%Emma Burleigh: 11.0%Fortune: 7.0%Negativity Bias57.3%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 1.7%Fortune: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 3.4%Emma Burleigh: 0.8%Fortune: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error3.4%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.1%Fortune: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.3%Fortune: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 1.2%Fortune: 3.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.3%Emma Burleigh: 1.1%Fortune: 1.5%Recency Bias7.3%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.2%Fortune: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 21.0%Emma Burleigh: 6.8%Fortune: 4.9%Appeal to Authority21.0%This article: 7.0%Emma Burleigh: 1.9%Fortune: 2.1%False Dilemma7.0%This article: 3.6%Emma Burleigh: 0.2%Fortune: 1.3%Slippery Slope3.6%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.2%Fortune: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 21.8%Emma Burleigh: 10.4%Fortune: 6.0%Hasty Generalization21.8%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.4%Fortune: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 15.2%Emma Burleigh: 4.4%Fortune: 3.0%Appeal to Emotion15.2%This article: 9.5%Emma Burleigh: 1.8%Fortune: 1.2%Begging the Question9.5%This article: 22.0%Emma Burleigh: 6.6%Fortune: 3.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)22.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 4.3%Emma Burleigh: 0.3%Fortune: 0.3%Burden of Proof4.3%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 1.0%Fortune: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.9%Fortune: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.6%Emma Burleigh: 4.6%Fortune: 2.5%Anecdotal6.6%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.4%Fortune: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 16.1%Emma Burleigh: 4.0%Fortune: 2.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)16.1%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.8%Fortune: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 19.4%Emma Burleigh: 1.9%Fortune: 1.5%Unattributed Quote19.4%This article: 9.1%Emma Burleigh: 1.3%Fortune: 1.3%Quote-first Misdirection9.1%This article: 13.2%Emma Burleigh: 2.7%Fortune: 4.5%Biased Writer Voice13.2%This article: 4.3%Emma Burleigh: 2.3%Fortune: 1.2%Indoctrination4.3%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.2%Fortune: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.0%Fortune: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Burleigh: 0.3%Fortune: 1.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

728 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers63%attributed speech266writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Brené Brown • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageBrené Brown • 27 words • 0.0% coverageBrené Brown • 18 words • 0.0% coverageBrené Brown • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 100.0% coverageBrené Brown • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageBrené Brown • 15 words • 0.0% coverageBrené Brown • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageBrené Brown • 23 words • 0.0% coverageBrené Brown • 16 words • 0.0% coverageBrené Brown • 19 words • 0.0% coverageBrené Brown • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageGoodwill’s CEO • 29 words • 100.0% coverageJeff Bezos • 26 words • 0.0% coverageBill Gates • 24 words • 0.0% coverageBill Gates • 16 words • 0.0% coverageBill Gates • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageBrené Brown • 31 words • 100.0% coverageBrené Brown • 31 words • 100.0% coverageBrené Brown • 22 words • 0.0% coverageBrené Brown • 46 words • 0.0% coverageFortune.com • 13 words • 0.0% coverageFortune.com • 7 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Goodwill’s CEO

100%flagged-word coverage
29 attributed words6.3% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+60.5 ptsWriter: 39.5%Goodwill’s CEO: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-24.4 ptsWriter: 24.4%Goodwill’s CEO: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-9.4 ptsWriter: 9.4%Goodwill’s CEO: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.