Opening up to others, coming to their aid is the only possible way to give meaning to our lives. A former scientist, now a Buddhist monk, provides scientific evidence against the “every man for himself” position.
Matthieu Ricard ‒ biologist, geneticist, in 1972 he abandoned his scientific career and settled in India and Nepal, where he devoted himself entirely to the study of Tibetan Buddhism. Monk, philosopher, personal translator of the Dalai Lama, author of several books, including The Art of Meditation, Speech in Defense of Altruism.
Psychologies: Why did you decide to write about altruism?
MR: It all started with the apparent impossibility of combining three time perspectives: short, medium and long term, which correspond to the three main axes of life – the economy, the search for happiness and the preservation of the environment. And I wondered what approach could bring them together. Altruism seemed the only thing that suited me.
As soon as you have more attention to other people, you stop playing with other people’s money, you strive to achieve an acceptable quality of life in society and take care of the state of the planet, which you will pass on to your children, so that it does not deteriorate.
So you offer society a new morality?
MR: No, because altruism is not only a value from the field of morality, it is very useful in practice! It corresponds much more to real life than selfishness. The egoist cuts himself off from reality, imagining that he is an autonomous unit, that he is able to live on his own without caring for others.
Meanwhile, from the point of view of the evolution of species, it is clear that the cooperation of individuals has always led to higher levels of complexity and to more progress than their competition. So there are many practical arguments proving that altruism is not a luxury, but a necessity.
And this is true also because it corresponds to the deepest property of human nature, namely the need to open up to other people.
If altruism is such a practical and natural behavior, why hasn’t it taken over?
MR: Of course, we still have a long way to go, but why do you say that he has not prevailed? The philosopher Hannah Arendt spoke of the “banality of evil,” but it is even more valid to speak of the “banality of good.”
Ten people working together and collaborating throughout the day is no surprise. But if one person commits a theft, everyone talks only about it. Passion for deviance, in particular for crime, leads to the fact that we cease to pay attention to what makes up the fabric of our existence – namely, good deeds, manifestations of camaraderie.
Every aggressive or selfish act shocks us precisely because it is “unbanal”!
You travel all over the world, see poverty, violence, wild capitalism – what makes you believe in a better future?
MR: A biting dog does more harm than a hundred peaceful dogs. A minority of businesses, being selfish but powerful, can have a detrimental effect. But I am encouraged just that I can “measure the intellectual temperature” in such areas as economics, psychology and natural sciences, and I can state that there is a growing interest in the values of cooperation everywhere.
It is enough to listen to the psychologist Paul Ekman, who devoted his life to the study of emotions; he once said to me, “Now my only concern is how to find a way to spread the ideas of altruism and compassion among people.”
Or read the famous economist Dennis Snower, who is sure that the path of care should go along with the path of reason. Or watch as we, along with the physician, Professor John Kabbat-Zeen, and neuroscientist Richard Davidson, present our vision to economists, generals and advisers from the inner circle of the President of the United States during the “brainstorming” …
All of this, coupled with the burgeoning activity of hundreds of thousands of NGOs or institutions like Khan Academy, gives me reason to believe that a real cultural shift is taking place.
You are constantly invited to speak to politicians, but are not in a hurry to implement your ideas. Doesn’t that discourage you from wanting to change society?
MR: We must admit that it takes time to implement any idea. In the 1960s, environmentalists (and I was one of them) were perceived by society as complete marginals. Today they hold positions in all governments.
Just as civilization used to ask questions about slavery or gender equality, now it is interested in the possibility of realizing those human virtues that are inherent in us. It inspires me and allows me to hope for the best.
As Victor Hugo said, there is nothing stronger than an idea whose time has come. The time for altruism is coming, this is obvious. In any case, we have no other choice.