Everything Is Not Fine 8%

By Jessi Gold

8/7/2026, 12:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Indoctrination, Representativeness Heuristic, and Appeal to Authority, with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 12.5% saturation with 130 hits. Analysis detected 380 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,039 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 17.3% and a BS Rank of 8% (27,729 of 30,055 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 92.30% of the article peer group.

When I first became a psychiatrist, I learned very quickly that it was not a fun job to mention at parties: 
“What do you do?” 
“I’m a doctor.” 
“What kind?” 
“A psychiatrist.” 
From there, one of two things usually happens. 
One, a person launches into a deeply personal story involving their depression, medications, marital collapse, family trauma, or some cocktail of all four before I even taken a bite of an appetizer. 
Or the person will laugh nervously and ask, “Are you analyzing me right now?” 
because apparently psychiatrists are also psychic and spend social events diagnosing strangers for kicks. 
It doesn’t matter whether I am at a wedding, in an Uber or on a dating app. 
The word “psychiatrist” turns me into either a receptacle for everyone’s problems or a personification of every fear they have about mental health. 
Naturally, I assumed this would be the only job title in my career that made people uncomfortable. 
I thought I’d found the hack to survival by following my therapist’s advice and telling people I am an accountant because “there are no follow-up questions.” 
Then, I became a chief wellness officer in higher education. 
That title creates a whole new category of confusion and awkwardness. 
Some people hear “wellness” and think yoga, smoothies and inspirational posters. 
Others assume I’ve arrived to deep breathe them out of their workplace stressors in place of actual institutional change. 
Of course, some of the questions come simply because my role is unique and new, and even I don’t always know how to explain what I do. 
Still, before you read another word of this column, I want to clear up any misconceptions and introduce myself properly and tell you what this space is and is not. 
Hi, I’m Jessi. 
I’m not an accountant. 
I’m a psychiatrist who sees patients and the chief wellness officer for a five-campus university system. 
I serve our students, faculty and staff. 
I work at the intersection of people, culture and institutional reality, which means I spend way too much time thinking about how higher education isn’t built to support its people as humans. 
After burning out badly myself in my old job, I learned that I’m also part of the group that isn’t fully supported by workplaces. 
But as a helper, I also don’t think I recognized that I needed or could need support, too. 
This column, “Everything Is Fine,” is named after a meme, the words on the mousepad in my office, and one of higher education’s favorite coping mechanisms: the default answer to the question, “How are you?” 
My favorite acronym for FINE is “feelings I’m not expressing,” and when I say that out loud in talks, people laugh because we laugh when it’s true. 
The title is not reassurance or blind optimism. 
It’s an invitation for deeper conversation about real vulnerability and feelings that higher education does not always welcome. 
I want to support the staff, administrators and faculty who are doing everything they can to support our students, but don’t always feel seen and heard themselves. 
I’ll talk about burnout, authentic leadership, toxic positivity, workplace uncertainty and other areas of higher ed that could benefit from real talk. 
If that sounds heavy or even a bit scary, don’t worry. 
I have no intention of writing a monthly mandatory training module or deep dive into emotions. 
I lean into irreverence, sarcasm and pop culture, but also care deeply about evidence. 
My goal isn’t to make light of the hard things, but to make the hard things easier to talk about. 
Wellness to me is not a side project or a branding exercise. 
It shapes whether people stay, lead and function inside our institutions. 
Let me clear up a few myths up front. 
First, wellness is not just mental health. 
Mental health matters enormously and is a large portion of what I hear about and talk about when I’m wearing both of my higher education hats. 
But wellness is bigger than counseling access or a crisis response. 
It includes eight dimensions, from spiritual to financial to intellectual, and looks at everything from prevention to intervention. 
Second, wellness is not “woo.” 
If a stress ball or affirmation gets you through a terrible meeting, that’s great. 
Keep doing that. 
But the work I care about is grounded in data, organizational change and the realities of how institutions actually function. 
Wellness is not distinct from the things every administrator cares about: recruitment, retention and the future of higher ed. 
It is a crosscutting element in all of it. 
Third, I am not here to pretend the system does not matter. 
In many cases, the system is the problem. 
But system change is slow and we still need to survive this week or this month or this meeting. 
We need to hold both things at once: Institutions need to change, and people and teams still need practical tools to function while that change happens on academia’s timeline. 
And finally, yes, I am going to ask about and talk about real feelings. 
Not because I want every cabinet meeting to become group therapy, but because “fine” and “OK” aren’t feelings (Just ask the movie *Inside Out*) and I’d love to see what happens in higher education when we reward more than just constantly pretending with productivity. 
All of that is what this column will explore. 
I’ll probably push a few buttons along the way, but we need to get uncomfortable for change to happen. 
Here’s the truth: I’m not fine. 
You aren’t fine. 
And higher education definitely isn’t fine. 
Pretending otherwise has not been an effective strategy for our people and institutions to thrive. 
But, if we can talk about it openly, maybe we can get through it better together. 
I’d say it’s about time we start. 
Jessi Gold is the chief wellness officer at the University of Tennessee System and an associate professor of psychiatry at the University of Tennessee Health Sciences. 
Her writing has appeared in a variety of publications including *The New York Times*, *The Journal of the American Medical Association* and *In Style*. 
She is also the author of the national best-selling book *How Do You Feel? 
One Doctor’s Search for Humanity in Medicine. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 1.6%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 2.5%Confirmation Bias1.6%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.6%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 1.2%Availability Heuristic2.6%This article: 4.2%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.6%Representativeness Heuristic4.2%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 3.5%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.7%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 1.5%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 3.9%Optimism Bias1.5%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 2.3%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 1.5%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 3.9%Negativity Bias1.5%This article: 2.3%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias2.3%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 3.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.8%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 1.3%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.1%Straw Man1.3%This article: 4.2%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 2.0%Appeal to Authority4.2%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 1.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 12.5%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 3.6%Hasty Generalization12.5%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.8%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.1%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.4%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.6%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 4.4%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 4.6%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.0%Indoctrination4.6%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jessi Gold: 0.0%Inside Higher Ed: 0.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

1039 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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