Empathic enlightenment

March 16, 2010 by
Filed under: Social brain, The RSA 

One of the privileges of my job is that I get regularly to chair lectures. Over time you start to notice patterns, albeit pretty obvious ones. Technology related events tend to attract younger people while lectures with more of a focus on manufacturing or business are a bit older. Ministers and shadow ministers are more likely to attract senior people from public and third sector organisations.

The weather makes a difference; too cold and wet and people don’t venture out, too sunny, and they choose an early evening drink over sitting in a lecture theatre. Audiences prefer informal discursive styles of presentation, they like to be engaged and have plenty of time for questions.    

So when the lectures team warned me last night that Jeremy Rifkin would go well over our preferred lecture time of 25 minutes I was concerned that the Great Room might get restless. I need not have worried. Rifkin spoke, largely without notes, for fifty minutes. And when he finished he received what was, to my reckoning, just about the most sustained applause I have heard for any speaker in my three years at the RSA.

Rifkin has written a very long and full book, The Empathic Civilisation, with a simple core thesis: we are in a race against time; will our capacity for empathy with those with whom we share the biosphere (human and non-human) save us from our potentially disastrous tendency to consume more energy at each stage of human development? The way out of this conundrum, says Rifkin, is to move from finite energy sources to distributed renewable systems.
These are not the idle speculations of an impractical visionary. Rifkin is a key advisor to the European Union. His book combines a passionate call for new ways of generating energy with powerful arguments about human nature and economic development. All major stages in human development have, he argues, been accompanied by new more intensive energy systems and new modes of communication which widen the boundaries within which human beings can exercise their ‘soft wired’ capacity for empathy. We now have the capacity for biosphere-wide empathy and we are going to need it if we are to accomplish the shift from carbon based energy. Hope, he says, lies with the young; the internet and new forms of education can lead to a step change in how they think about themselves and relate to the world.   

Rifkin is critical of aspects of what he sees as enlightenment thought. These include the emphasis on the individual, the assumption that systems are best understood by breaking them up into their constituent parts rather than exploring them as integrated wholes, and the Cartesian separation of mind and body. However, his aim is to reform not to abandon the enlightenment project.

Before the lecture he told me about a Council of Europe project about reclaiming and redefining the enlightenment. Given that the RSA’s newly launched strap line (now to be seen behind the splendid new coffee station in John Adam Street) is 21st century enlightenment, I was keen to explore partnership.

Like many, I suspect, I often engage, as a matter of politeness, in business card swapping, only to find them dog eared weeks later in my wallet or jacket pocket. But Jeremy Rifkin’s card has been wedged in the corner of my computer screen. As soon as I’ve got through the five speeches I have scheduled this week (one down, four to go) I’ll be taking up his offer to explore how the RSA could become the UK partner in a debate about the kind of enlightenment Europe needs now.

Share

Comments

2 Comments on Empathic enlightenment

  1. Patricia on Tue, 16th Mar 2010 4:39 pm
  2. Rifkin’s lecture has left me with a simple, perhaps a naïve question: if the capacity for empathy is a real and wide-spread psychological phenomenon, why is it that we have been ignoring this natural inclination so very successfully throughout history? (The fate of Jesus here comes to mind as one of more explicit examples of human ‘nastiness’ overriding the principle to ‘love thy brother’). It is also kind of amusing that Rousseau, Rawls and the likes wasted all this time trying to ‘construct’ social orders by stripping humans of their natural inclination… while empathy is in fact the panacea to all social ills.

    Perhaps Rifkin would argue that we are conditioned by our social structures to suppress this instinct?

    There seems to be an alternative explanation for why empathy can hardly be said a universal principle of human conduct (although, on certain occasions, we do act as if we were capable of ‘feeling’ somebody else’s pain). Rather than empathy, what allows us to relate to others is a capacity for enlarged mentality or representative thinking (paradoxically, a key Enlightenment notion!). What is at issue here is a capacity for transcending one’s individuality by ‘comparing our judgment with the possible rather than the actual judgments of others, and by putting ourselves in the place of any other man’. Arendt, who championed this notion, stressed that ‘this is a question of neither empathy… nor of counting noses and joining a majority’ – it is an effort of putting ourselves in the place of any other man with the help of imagination; the effort of representing in one’s mind the standpoint of other community members.

    Unlike empathy, representative thinking is not an instinctive, involuntary action but something we choose to do; it is a conscious act of will… This could explain why, although we are capable of relating to others in this way, we seem so often to choose to override the principle to ‘love thy brother’.

  3. Mike on Wed, 17th Mar 2010 10:54 am
  4. As an antidote to Rifkin I would suggest reading John Gray’s review of his book in last Saturdays Guardian review http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/mar/13/empathetic-civilization-jeremy-rifkin-climate

    and perhaps also David Mackay’s Sustainable Energy without the hot air (downloadable from his website) – which knocks the distributed renewable systems idea right out of the park

    And anyone who thinks the internet is a vehicle for spreading empathy really ought to get onto it more!

Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!