Universe 25: When Perfect is Not Enough revisits the infamous mouse utopia experiment by John B. Calhoun and asks whether abundance, convenience, and perfection are unraveling modern society. Why was this an important book for you to write?

The Universe 25 experiment conducted by John B. Calhoun fascinated me because it forces us to confront an uncomfortable idea. What if collapse does not begin with scarcity, but with comfort? In Calhoun’s controlled mouse utopia, food was unlimited, predators were absent, and physical needs were met. Yet social breakdown still followed. When I looked at modern society, I could not ignore the parallels. We have unprecedented access to food, technology, entertainment, and comfort. But anxiety, division, loneliness, and identity confusion are rising.

This book was important to write because it challenges the assumption that progress automatically equals improvement. Material abundance does not guarantee psychological resilience or social cohesion. I wanted to explore whether we have removed too many meaningful struggles from life and whether, in doing so, we may also be removing purpose. The experiment becomes a mirror. It asks whether we are building a civilization that satisfies appetite but neglects responsibility.

For me, Universe 25 was not about condemning modernity. It was about questioning it. That questioning is necessary if we want to avoid repeating patterns we do not fully understand.

What does Universe 25 suggest about purpose, struggle, and shared responsibility?

One of the strongest lessons of Universe 25 is that purpose cannot be manufactured by comfort alone. The mice were physically secure, yet socially disoriented. Roles dissolved. Hierarchies collapsed. Parental instincts failed. Without meaningful challenges, many withdrew into passive existence. Calhoun called this the “behavioral sink.”

In human terms, struggle is not simply an obstacle. It is a framework that shapes identity. Responsibility to family, to community, and to something beyond the self creates cohesion. When everything is provided but nothing is required, a strange emptiness can emerge. Shared responsibility becomes optional, and optional responsibility is rarely sustained.

The experiment suggests that abundance without structure weakens societies. Struggle, when constructive and shared, builds resilience. It forces cooperation, adaptation, and accountability. Purpose often arises from overcoming difficulty together. Remove the need to contribute, and you risk removing the sense of belonging.

Where do you think the analogy breaks down—and where does it hold strongest?

The analogy breaks down where human complexity begins. We are not mice in cages. Humans possess self-awareness, culture, philosophy, and the ability to reflect on our own decline. We can change course. We can redefine meaning. We can recognize when something is wrong and act intentionally to correct it. The mice could not hold conferences about their existential crisis.

However, the analogy holds strongest in the realm of social behavior under artificial abundance. When natural pressures disappear, internal pressures often increase. Competition shifts from survival to status. Identity becomes fragile. Isolation grows. Social fragmentation accelerates. In that sense, the parallels are powerful.

Universe 25 does not claim we are destined to follow the same path. It simply shows that removing hardship does not automatically produce harmony. That lesson remains deeply relevant.

You end the book with cautious hope—what gives you that hope?

Hope comes from awareness. The very fact that we can examine experiments like Universe 25 and debate their implications sets us apart. Humans are capable of adaptation on a conscious level. We can reintroduce meaning, responsibility, and shared goals deliberately rather than waiting for collapse to force it upon us.

History shows cycles of decline and renewal. Societies fragment, but they also reform. Individuals rediscover purpose. Communities rebuild. The modern world is not doomed because it is comfortable. It is only at risk if it forgets that comfort must be balanced with contribution.

Cautious hope comes from the belief that struggle does not need to be catastrophic to be meaningful. We can choose growth over decay. That choice remains available to us.

Author Links: GoodReads | Facebook | Amazon