If a better world is possible, especially in times like these, is an important question. However, if someone expresses themselves in this way, with confidence in humanity and even advocating for kindness, the first reaction from their interlocutors is disbelief. They will label them as cheesy, perhaps simple, surely naive. But what if the one asking is a scientist who, at the same time, admits that we are all somewhat cynical?
That is Jamil Zaki, a professor of psychology at Stanford University, director of the Stanford Social Neuroscience Lab, and author of an essay, 'The War for Kindness' (HarperOne), which aims to convince of something that seems from another era: that we need each other and that we must regain (lost) faith in humanity. And that trusting our fellow human beings again is necessary if we do not want things to get worse.
The publication of his book this week coincides with Zaki's work stay in our country. He is living in Madrid with his family and continues to teach at Stanford's Madrid division. Furthermore, he will give a lecture on the 9th at the Instituto Internacional where he will explore "how to find hope in such cynical times."
The first step would be to accept what science has already shown. For example, as Zaki explains, "that the majority of people value compassion over selfishness, that donating money activates similar regions to those activated when eating chocolate, and that helping others overcome their stress alleviates our own."
Before we continue, a suggestion: take a few seconds to consider how much cynicism is in you, and what you think you achieve by being cynical.
In his essay, he establishes differences between being cynical and being skeptical. Above all, he believes that it is best to be a hopeful skeptic. How can this be achieved?
To move away from cynicism, or to stop being cynical, one must start thinking like a scientist. And one must rid oneself of all those stereotypes that come with being cynical, such as always achieving success or making a lot of money. On the contrary, numerous studies show that cynics earn less money and that dishonest and unpleasant people have fewer opportunities to advance in positions of power within organizations. Skepticism, on the other hand, is fundamentally a scientific perspective, from which it is possible to say, "Not everyone is so terrible, nor is everyone so good." While the cynic believes that not being one makes them gullible, a fool. A hopeful skeptic would be someone who takes the time to truly try to perceive how the other person is, even if they have to go through the shadows of their own mind.
What else happens, scientifically speaking?
You begin to realize that people, in general, are willing to help. The tragic part is not seeing it. Or that loneliness and isolation are such a huge problem today. As a species, we have never been as alone as we are now.
He also states in his book that optimism and hope are very different concepts.
It is important to separate one from the other. Optimism is the belief that everything will be fine, and this is a good feeling, but it can also make you passive. Something similar happens with cynicism: if you believe everything will be fine, then you have nothing to do, but if you believe everything will go wrong, you also have nothing to do. Hope embraces the thought that things can get better, but we really cannot know for sure. And because we do not know, we need to do something. For me, and for science, hope consists precisely of understanding that nothing is perfect, but having the desire for it to be better.
What happens to those who have no hope?
For example, we know that cynics tend not to vote, not attend protests, or engage in social movements. For example, I am not an optimist, but being hopeful is my way of fighting for a better future because I believe it is possible.
'Hope for Cynics' begins with the story of who Emile Bruneau was, his university companion and friend, as well as someone for whom hope sprang instinctively.
Emile is the person in whom I have believed the most in my entire life, even though I often cannot even believe in myself. We both studied the same thing, the good in people, and I, as a scientist, believe in what I study, but as an individual, I sometimes struggle to trust people. Emile never doubted, science entered his head and reached his heart in a way unknown to me. Knowing him was inspiring and challenging. At first, I thought he was lying, that no one could be like that, but he was, and when I learned about the hardships in his life, I understood that he had been able to generate his own hope. And I thought, "Why can't I be like that?" Then Emile died, he can no longer be as he was, but we can all be a little like him. He wanted to write a book before he died, and he asked for my help, but his brain cancer was progressing, and he began to lose abilities. 'Hope for Cynics' is not the book Emile would have written, but I wanted to convey his legacy along with a scientific message and the idea that people are better than we think.
How can we be a little more like Emile? How can we trust others in times like these?
First of all, we must realize that probably within each of us there is a cynic. More than recognizing the cynics around us, we must recognize our own cynical voice. But we must distinguish between what a cynic says and what a cynic feels. They may say, for example, that no one can be trusted, give the impression of feeling superior, arrogant, egotistical... But if you look at what they feel, it turns out they are the opposite: they are scared, insecure... Comedian George Carlin said, "Scratch a cynic and you'll find a disappointed idealist."
Is the cynic born or made?
More like the latter. We all desperately need others to survive and thrive, but many of us have suffered in the past, felt betrayed, hurt, traumatized... When you experience this, it is very difficult to trust again. The cynic appears strong and critical, but in reality, they are suffering. Cynicism is not combated by trying to convince them not to be cynical, but by looking beneath that cynicism and trying to understand the person. I do not think the best way to treat a cynic is with cynicism because that only reinforces and validates their defensive walls. When you are cynical with a cynic, you are being exactly what they expect you to be.
But we are used to seeing, socially, that the worse, the better, that those who are amoral tend to fare better in life or professionally.
These are the stereotypes I referred to earlier. The plural of a story is not data, and we must go beyond anecdotes, beyond phrases like "that CEO is horrible but runs a great company." In reality, being kind and honest is the true path to success because it leads us to build partnerships, collaborations, friendships... Furthermore, to succeed in a competitive job, you need a team you can trust. Regarding life beyond work: So what if it is like that? So what if liars make more money than generous people? Do you really want to be that person? Is it worth making a lot of money while your personal relationships dissolve? Is that true wealth? No, in fact, it is the opposite of wealth. And even if we think that someone has achieved success by being a bad person, the reality is that their life is probably not as great, and they likely live in emotional and spiritual poverty.
One thing that is clear after reading your book is that you are certain that humanity has lost faith in itself. Interestingly, last week in these same pages, your compatriot Michael J. Sandel expressed the same sentiment.
I deeply admire Professor Sandel because not only does he show us through his work that our relationships and our faith in ourselves are declining, but he also explains why. He says we seek a comfortable life, and we have turned everything into a transaction: we sell our time, we sell our mind, our body... And if everything is part of the market, even things related to human life, your environment becomes a place where there is no room for trust in the goodness and intentions of others.