07 Shame or pride

What story do we tell ourselves about humanity? A pessimistic story of shame at our shortcomings, or a story of pride at our achievements? We are faced with a paradox: while the world is objectively getting better all the time, we seem to have lost faith in ourselves and in humanity's progress. In unpacking this paradox, we examine the strange power of negative news, humanity as a clumsy but well-meaning adolescent, the surprising idealism of those who argue that humanity is failing, and the power of an aspirational narrative.

Transcript

Shame or Pride

Welcome to Cornucopia, the podcast in which we examine what it means to live abundantly. Today I'm walking in Frigiliana, in Southern Spain, the sun is hanging low over the sea in front of me. 

I wanted to discuss how we are doing. I think that quite a lot of our thinking these days, a lot of the newspaper articles, is that we are not really doing very well as humanity. There are wars going on, there is widespread poverty, there is all forms of cruelty and exploitation. There are all kinds of abuse, physical abuse, mental abuse, emotional abuse, there are vast differences between people who are economically well off and those that are poor. There are political tensions, there are very strong disagreements about things. And on top of that, we could argue that we are destroying the planet, that in terms of the loss of species through encroaching habitats, climate change, which isn't such a problem for the planet, really, but it's a problem for us. But, at any rate, that human beings are kind of making a mess of it, and that we are in a crisis. 

So, in a moment of upheaval, that we have taken the wrong road, we've taken the wrong direction, we are doing things wrong. Some people argue that it is a question of choice, or a question of how we organise ourselves, or question of politics. Other people will argue that this is just human nature. We are apes, and we are competitive, and we are actually quite mean, and we are selfish, and we are cruel, and aggressive. Whatever veneer of civilization and laws we invent, we will always revert to this intrinsic human nature. So, on any account, that is a fairly bleak view of what humans are, a fairly bleak view of humanity, and a fairly bleak view of our current situation. 

It's a view that I would argue we see quite a lot of. It depends a little bit on the kind of newspapers you read, but the newspapers that I read tend to have this as their overarching view. There are a lot of pessimists, or realists they might call themselves, global thinkers, global pundits, who argue that, in fact, humanity is on the wrong track, or that humanity itself is a problem. And in that sense, the overriding feeling should be one of shame or dejection, or “well, you know, this is all there is, and we're not doing a good job”. 

Now, there is, of course, an alternative view: not so much the glass half empty, but the glass half full view, the view that this time at the beginning of the 21st century is a great time to be alive, that by all kinds of objective indicators, this is the best time that humanity has ever brought forth, that there is a lot of data to substantiate that we've never been so healthy, we've never had such great life expectancy. We have never been so wealthy; we have never had the opportunities that we've had before. That billions of people are living lives in which they can make their own decisions, in terms of work, in terms of their partner, in terms of the kind of life they want to lead. That, sure, there are a whole bunch of problems, some to do with poverty, economic problems, political problems, problems of aggression and war, tension. There are climate problems, which are caused by development, but that in general, if you look at the longer span of human development, then it's a line of progress. 

The strange thing is that even though these indicators are quite objective - it's not a question of choosing your data, the data is, by all accounts, just telling one story, namely that things are getting better all the time - there is a sense that why, if this is such positive news, why is this story being told less? Or why are there fewer people who are distinctly proud of what we have achieved, as humanity, as a human race, who see progress not just in our economic well-being, but progress in terms of freedom, progress in terms of possibility, progress in terms of different lifestyles, progress in terms of everybody being able to decide for themselves what they want. 

And even moral progress: that even though exploitation and abuse exist, they don't exist on the scale that they used to in the past, when we had slavery, for example, and all kinds of forms of indentured servitude, and that really, there is a line of progress, and that we can expect that line of progress to continue in the coming decades, in the coming centuries, and that we are engaged in quite a journey as humanity. Now, this view is a minority view, it's not the view that you often see people writing about. There are some writers who argue for this, some intellectual writers, some people in newspapers, who now and then would write an article saying, “well, you know, amidst all the crisis, and all the negative news, there is also a good story”. But, in general, this view is rather less popular, or less written about.

[music]

So, let's examine why that is, and perhaps, what difference it makes whether we start from a feeling of shame or a feeling of pride; whether we believe that we're on the wrong path, whether we believe that humanity is a disaster; or whether we believe that we're basically on the right path, and that we're learning as we go along. 

One of the things, of course, in terms of the news is that people say “well, negative news grabs our attention much more”. If there is a bit of negative news, then we respond to that, perhaps out of a deep-seated fight-or-flight response, that in the past, if we ignored danger, then we could get eaten by some kind of predator. So, we have been very attuned to recognising danger signals. For the same reason, we're not as attuned to recognising signals that things are well. 

The other element is that negative things tend to be sudden. They tend to be a plane crash, or a war breaking out, or some financial malfeasance, or some other sort of exploitation, or corruption, or something or other that you can make a good story out of. Whereas progress tends to be gradual. Everything improves, day by day, week by week, month by month, year by year. If we don't take stock of this progress, then it seems like they're very small gains, very incremental gains. If people are lifted, millions of people are lifted out of poverty, we don't really write about that. If we've transported five billion passengers with commercial aeroplanes without a single fatality, as we have done in some years recently, then that doesn't really merit a bit of news, even though it's a remarkable achievement.

So, negative news grabs our attention more than positive news and that's one of the reasons why it's more prevalent. But I think there is also some deeper sense at stake here. It matters. It matters what global story we're telling ourselves, it matters what frame of mind we are living in, as it were, or living with. If we look at humanity as something to be ashamed of, as by nature deficient, then there is a danger that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. That is how we set our expectations: the planet or the world would be better off without us. Sometimes this borders on self-hate. 

But I'm really curious. Where does this sense of shame in humanity, where does this sense of self-hate that the planet would be better off without us, that the story of humanity is one that's not worth being told, that it’s one that's not worth happening, where does that come from? Why, with all this objective progress, and everything we’re doing, and this human creativity, and human joy, and people living fulfilling lives, why are we so negative about ourselves? Why are we so negative about the future? 

It could just be a sign of the times. I think it's clear that in the 60s and 70s of the last century, we were a lot more positive. We were a lot more positive about progress, we were a lot more positive about the future. We were reaching for the stars - literally and figuratively. And because we saw fairly rapid progress in terms of technology, in terms of society, in terms of possibilities like global air travel, we believed in progress. 

That sense of belief and progress has taken quite a hit. Partially, it's because I would argue that we've become spoiled. We're richer than we were at any time before, and yet we find more things to complain about. That, in itself, is a sign that we're doing well. If you can complain about relatively small things, then that's a sign that there is nothing large that you need to complain about. 

I think that this realisation that there is ecological damage through our progress has really put a question mark around this progress. If you know what I argue for normally, you'd realise that I argue that these things are actually quite separate. That, in fact, progress is the way to have ecologically less damaging activity. That, in fact, the activity that we used to do when we were cutting down forests to heat our homes was also incredibly damaging, even if it was a few centuries ago. 

So, to me, it's really quite puzzling. There is a paradox, if you will, between how we're actually doing, and how we're thinking that we're doing, between the story that we could be telling about human progress and the ambition that we could be having to make the world even better, and the sense of dejection and self-loathing that we sometimes find, and this sense that we're in a constant crisis. If you have a situation like this, a paradoxical situation, it's interesting to ask “why”. Why is that? Why, in a time of global progress, are we so negative about humanity? 

[music]

I've been thinking about this paradox on and off for a couple of years now. One of the answers I've been getting to, is that we seem to be forgetting that we're doing many of these things for the first time, that we're trying things out. That, humanity for all its progress and technology, is still very much like an adolescent. That it has gained new powers: new technological powers, new economic powers, but that it's not quite used to these powers yet. It hasn't acquired the wisdom, or the habit or the use of these powers. 

You know, when you're an adolescent - they have these large, strong bodies, and they're sometimes a little bit awkward, because they don't actually know how to use these powers yet. They're a lot stronger than they think they are, because before they were children, and they were less physically strong, and now suddenly, they have this strength and these capacities, and they are new. And so, you have to somehow try things out. And many of the things you try out will be perhaps wrongheaded, or reckless, or, in a certain sense, not lead - not very wise. That is the impetuousness of youth, and eventually you realise that perhaps that's not the best way to go about it, you know. 

And we are quite forgiving, I imagine, as a society to some of these youthful behaviours, some of this youthful behaviour, youthful indiscretions, or whatever you want to call them. We recognise that there is a stage when you're moving from one way of being - as a child where everything is decided for you, and you live in a world that makes sense, and hopefully in a loving family - to a world where, increasingly, you're going to make your own decisions and your own choices. And you're going to have to decide for yourself what you want and what you like and what you're going to do, and take responsibility for these actions. 

So, in a certain sense with humanity we're at this pivotal point. We are acquiring all these powers. These powers to change the climate: this is the Anthropocene, the era in which human beings can change the climate through their greenhouse gases. We are manipulating the world through levels of code, with our mRNA vaccines, for example. We are capable of changing DNA and playing around with DNA. We are getting ever more skilled at dealing with the building blocks of life. We have managed to manipulate symbols in a very efficient way, with computers and software programming. We have a global communication system with the Internet, that is incredibly cheap, considering what you can do with it, compared to what we had even a few decades ago. 

We are really shifting, in the last few decades, quite fundamentally, in the effect we have on the world. In that sense, I think it's comparable to being an adolescent. So, perhaps it's understandable that we think that we're going the wrong way, because we are trying things out. So, one of the ways to be a bit more compassionate, really, about humanity, about the things that we're doing, about the wrong paths that we've taken, about the errors that we've made, about the stupid things that we've done -and we've done stupid things -, is to compare ourselves more to an adolescent than to an already wise and mature person.

[music]

There's also a second way in which I think we can look at this paradox. And that is to think: what are we comparing ourselves to? What were our expectations? What are you comparing it to? What are we comparing it to? If you're thinking “well, you know, humanity's full of exploitation of the planet, and people and we're disorganised, and we're cruel”. Yes, I will grant that. All those statements are true. But compared to what? Compared to some mythical sense of a paradise? 

If we think of humanity as an evolutionary process: we are descended from apes, we have gained consciousness, we have large brains that are capable of solving things. We have found ways to organise ourselves, we are changing the makeup of this planet, in many ways, some good, some bad, depending on who's involved. But what alternative story are you comparing it to, right? If you grade somebody, then if you grade an exam, for example, it's quite clear what a top mark, or 100% would be, right? Getting all the answers right. And, if you make mistakes, then you will get points deducted, and you might fail or get a passing grade, or who knows what. 

But, in terms of humanity's progress, what is this ideal progress? Is this that we would not make any mistakes? Is it that we would not be cruel? Is it that we would be extremely fair in in how we treat each other? Is it a life where there is no aggression, and no cruelty, and no abuse? Is it a world without mistakes? It's very hard to think of this world. I mean, we have imagined different forms of paradise in religions, and people have this utopia. Ideological utopias: the world would be much better if…, if only this… But these are often states that we've never achieved, and they are perhaps things we can strive for. But it's a bit strange to hold ourselves accountable to that. What are we being graded on, if you want to use that terminology of teaching? 

The more I think of it, the more I realise this is actually quite an important point. I think if we are thinking that we're coming up short, if we are negative about our progress, then we can only feel that if we have a certain standard, a certain benchmark in our head. It only makes sense to say that you're doing badly if you have an idea of what doing well would mean. And even though I'm actually in favour of being ambitious for the future, and believe in human progress, I actually think that having an unrealistic benchmark, and then just counting the negative - where do we fall short? - is actually not very inspiring. 

I think the idea of making a world with less exploitation, and more possibilities, and more wealth, and more freedom, and more health, and better for the planet, all these ideas of making a thriving humanity on a thriving planet, I think these are all aspirational. This is all the road ahead, as it were. We can imagine that we're striving there, and that we're slowly making progress, that we will make some wrong turns, we will make decisions which seems smart at the time and turn out to be actually quite stupid, we will invest in a certain way, for example, in our energy needs through fossil fuels, and only later realise that, “oh, well, putting out all this carbon in the atmosphere is changing the climate in such a rapid way that we are suffering”. So, you try things, and then you have no idea what it's going to lead to, and then you realise that it has unintended side effects, and then you change course. 

The whole learning process is one of, well, trial and error in some way. And I think the problem is not trying many different things, the problem is sticking with something when you know that it's not working. I think at the moment to argue that we must keep investing in fossil fuels, or that this is the future, I think at some point it becomes stupid. At some point, it becomes damaging, and perhaps even criminal. You know that you're damaging the ecosystem, you know that you're damaging human health, and you still persist in doing it. But that doesn't mean that trying things out in itself is wrong.

And so, interestingly enough, I would argue that if we think that we're doing badly as humanity, if we think there's something fundamentally wrong with human nature, or decisions that we make, individually, or communally, or globally, then we are, in a certain sense, comparing ourselves to a standard which is too high. 

And so, you get a very strange reversal, as you often get with paradoxes. When you have a paradox, when you have things which seem contradictory. There are a series of contradictions involved. So, the contradiction is: we're doing really quite well objectively as humanity, by all kinds of objective measurements, and yet, we have the feeling that we're on the wrong path, causing crises, and perhaps that we shouldn't exist at all. That paradox between doing well objectively and the subjective feeling of doing badly. 

But the other reversal is that the people who seem to be pessimistic, namely, or realistic - people who said: look at everything that we're doing wrong, look at these forms of exploitation, look at this fraud, look at people cheating, look at tax evasion, look at pollution, look at cruelty and violence, etcetera, et cetera. The people who seem to have such a negative view can only have that negative view because they're comparing it to some perfect or better future. They must have a standard that they're comparing it to. Otherwise, you can't make that judgement. It's a relative judgement to say we're doing badly. You must have in your head some idea that humanity ought to be perfect. It ought to be perfect in everything that it does. There should be a world, at the moment, where we take better care of the planet, where we take better care of each other, where we have much less violence and exploitation, etc. So, even though you might be a pessimist or realist, in reality, you are a kind of weird kind of optimist, namely, that you think that the standard should be so high. You basically take heaven or paradise as your standard, and you're seeing with falling short, and that's why I'm negative.  

And, conversely, if you're an optimist saying “well, you know, we've done quite well as human nature, look at all the things we've achieved, look at the progress that we've made. Yes, there are certain setbacks, but overall, I don't think we're doing too badly. Look at all the improvements we've made over the last centuries of the last decades. Look at all the possibilities for the future”. You tend to be seen, often, as a naive optimist. You know, how could you think that when all these things are going wrong? When, in fact, I think you are not comparing it to some ideal benchmark. You're just saying,  “well, it is what it is”. You're comparing it to a point in the past, to a historical point, you're looking back and saying “well, this is the progress that we've made, doing pretty well as far as we go”. 

And sure, you could say, could we have done better? Yes, I think we could have done better. If things had moved one way or another way, or we had realised certain things before. Or, if when we find out that things are damaging, we're a little bit faster at admitting it and changing our ways. Yes, we could have stopped with slavery earlier than we did, we could have allowed women to vote a lot earlier than we did, we could have stopped forms of exploitations, we can stop forms of exploitations of human beings and animals that we're using at the moment, we could be more careful in certain things. All that is true. But it doesn't take away from the fact that we're doing pretty well as we're doing. 

Naive optimism then tends to be a fairly realistic, and a fairly modest, assessment of human beings. And in this case, then, future progress is seen as aspirational. Yes, we could do better in the future. Let's develop energy that is carbon-free: forms of solar, or thermal, or nuclear fusion. Let's make plenty of energy for everybody. Let's create wealth, and also create so much wealth that we can distribute it easily, and that if people acquire wealth, they don't do it by taking it away from other people. There are forms of moral progress that we could make, in terms of how we treat other human beings, how we treat certain animals. There are ways to organise ourselves politically in different ways. There are ways to reduce tension, there are ways to become more peaceful, or to realise that war is not the solution to disagreements or conflict.

[music]

I have a strong sense that having a positive story about human development, a positive story which doesn't deny the crisis that we're in, doesn't deny the severity of some of our problems, doesn't deny the urgency of climate change but says “well, there's lots of stuff we can do about it, so let's get going, let's do these things. Let's be involved, let's be engaged in changing the things we think could be changed or should be changed. Let's do this out of a sense of possibility, and a sense of belief in our own creativity, our own inventions, our own capacity to make the structures, our own capacity to create the world that we live in”. 

If we look at the world that we've built, and I'm descending in this plain here in the south of Spain, and looking at this fairly old village, and further on, there are coastal cities. I see progress. These cities were a lot poorer, half a century ago. And we can have a romantic view saying, “oh, this was such a cute Spanish fishing village”. Absolutely. But we forget this is a very romantic lens to look at the past with. We forget that the fishing life was a life of hardship, of poverty, that it was dangerous, that the sea took lives. We forget that this abject poverty made people live lives that they didn't perhaps want to live, that their possibilities to move away from their village or live a different life were very restricted. We forget that people didn't have access to all the things they have access to now. People wanted to improve their lot, wanted to improve that situation, wanted to have more opportunity for themselves, and especially for their children. And that's why we're engaged in this story. That's why we invent new things. That's why we build new things. That's why we have developed economies, to make things and sell them to each other, and build things. 

So to wrap this up: I'm looking at a setting sun now. The sky in front of me is glowing orange, turning red. I have a little bit of track ahead of me, I have some lights in case darkness falls. And coming down this mountain, I'm reconnecting with this belief in human nature, with his faith in human nature, with this idea that we're engaged in one large experiment called humanity, which is composed of lots of small experiments and myriad tiny experiments, that we have 8 billion souls who are finding their way in life, undergoing this experience of being alive, more souls than we've ever had living at the same time. 

That we've created an enormous capacity for health, healthy lives, for prosperity, for freedom to make choices in our lives. We have the capacity to decide what the planet is going to be like, in terms of climate, in terms of our cohabitation with other forms, other species, other animals. We are creators, we all shapers, shapers of the physical world around us, shapers of the organisations and systems that we live in, shapers of the morality that we aspire to. 

If we don't believe that this morality comes from above, that we are being graded on some of our behaviour by a stern teacher or a stern father, then it's up to us to decide how we're doing. And I think that the idea that we're doing well, that we're building on past successes, is perhaps the most inspirational story. That's the story that makes me want to do more. That's the story that makes me want to be involved. That's the story that I think will get other people involved. That's the story that we want to be engaged in. It's going to be fun, it's going to be challenging, it's going to be exciting, it's going to be different. Perhaps for that, it makes a lot more sense to have the idea that we're doing well, that, looking back on the history of human nature, we see a history of progress, a history of economic progress, a history of progress in health, progress in opportunity, progress in variety of lifestyles that we can live, progress in freedom. 

If you are the imaginary friend that I'm talking to, on this path, going down, if we are really having a conversation, which is a one-on-one conversation, even though you're an imaginary friend at the moment because I am actually going down this path alone, then the question is really a question I'm asking you. What story about humanity and human progress is the story that you have, the story that you tell yourself, the story that you tell other people? Is it a story that makes you happy, that makes you confident, that makes you proud? Or is it a story that makes you critical, that makes you sad, that makes you ashamed? 

And, if it is the latter, is then what if you change the story? Would it be worth giving it a try? If you shift your frame to saying, rather than focus on everything that we're doing wrong, and believing that we're falling short, what about being proud of what we've done right? And acknowledging that we make mistakes, but correcting those mistakes? What about developing some self-compassion? We are compassionate and tolerant of youthful excesses in our society, in our culture. Well, perhaps we should treat ourselves as the youth that we can be tolerant about. 

And what would that change for you? If you had that different outlook, that belief that trust, that pride in humanity, what would it open up for you? What actions, what ideas? What engagements in your future, in our future does this open up? I'll leave you with these thoughts as the sun is really about to set now, signing off on this path - and see you in the next episode of Cornucopia.