Why, in a country that consumes 25% of the world's resources (the U.S.), is there an epidemic of loneliness, depression, and anxiety? Why do so many in the West who have all of their basic needs met still feel impoverished? While some politicians might answer, "It's the economy, stupid," Based on scientific evidence, a better answer is, "It's the lack compassion, stupid."
I recently attended the Templeton Prize ceremony at St. Paul's Cathedral in London and have been reflecting on the words of His Holiness the Dalai Lama in conversation with Arianna Huffington: "If we say, oh, the practice of compassion is something holy, nobody will listen. If we say, warm-heartedness really reduces your blood pressure, your anxiety, your stress and improves your health, then people pay attention." As director of the Center for Compassion and Altruism Research and Education (CCARE) at Stanford University (one of the two organizations recognized in the Templeton Prize press release), I would agree with the Dalai Lama.
What exactly is compassion? Compassion is the recognition of another's suffering and a desire to alleviate that suffering. Often brushed off as a hippy dippy religious term irrelevant in modern society, rigorous empirical data supports the view of all major world religions: compassion is good.
Our poverty in the West is not that of the wallet but rather that of social connectedness. In this modern world where oftentimes both parents work, we are spending less time as a family. People are living farther away from extended families and perhaps more disconnected than ever before as suggested by Robert Putnam in Bowling Alone. Putman observes that we thrive under conditions of social connection but that trust and levels of community engagement are on the decline. Loneliness is on the rise and is one of the leading reasons people seek counseling.
One particularly telling survey showed that 25% of Americans have no one that they feel close enough with to share a problem. That means that one in four people that you meet has no one to talk to and it is affecting their health. Steve Cole from UCLA, a social neuro-genetics scientist, has shown that loneliness leads to a less healthy immune stress profile at the level of the gene -- their gene expression makes them more vulnerable to inflammatory processes which have been shown to have negative effects on health. Research by expert well-being psychologists Ed Diener and Martin Seligman indicates that social connectedness is a predictor of longer life, faster recovery from disease, higher levels of happiness and well-being, and a greater sense of purpose and meaning. One large-scale study showed that lack of social connectedness predicts vulnerability to disease and death above and beyond traditional risk factors such as smoking, blood pressure, obesity and lack of physical activity.
While many pay attention to their diet and go to the gym regularly to improve their health, they don't think of social connectedness this way. Just like physical fitness, compassion can be cultivated and maintained. Chuck Raison and colleagues at Emory University have demonstrated that a regular compassion meditation practice reduces negative neuroendocrine, inflammatory and behavioral responses to psychosocial stress. Exercising compassion not only strengthens one's compassion but brings countless benefits to oneself and others. In fact, Jonathan Haidt at the University of Virginia and others have shown that, not only are we the recipient of compassion's benefits but others are inspired when they see compassionate actions and in turn become more likely to help others in a positive feedback loop.
As human beings, we will inevitably encounter suffering at some point in our lives. However, we also have evolved very specific social mechanisms to relieve that pain: altruism and compassion. It is not just receiving compassion that relieves our pain. Stephanie Brown, professor at SUNY Stony Brook University and the University of Michigan, has shown that the act of experiencing compassion and helping others actually leads to tremendous mental and physical well-being for us as well. While survival of the fittest may lead to short-term gain, research clearly shows it is survival of the kindest that leads to the long-term survival of a species. It is our ability to stand together as a group, to support each other, to help each other, to communicate for mutual understanding, and to cooperate, that has taken our species this far. Compassion is an instinct. Recent research shows that even animals such as rats and monkeys will go through tremendous effort and cost to help out another of its species who is suffering. We human beings are even more instinctually compassionate; our brains are wired for compassion.
At Stanford University's Center for Compassion and Altruism Research and Education (CCARE), in collaboration with colleagues in psychology and the neurosciences worldwide, we aim to further research on compassion and altruism. I'm happy to report that in July, CCARE will be sponsoring the largest gathering of experts ever brought together on this topic in a conference entitled, Science of Compassion: Origins, Measures and Interventions. Many of the pioneering researchers of compassion, including several mentioned in this article, will be presenting their latest research findings there. We invite you to join us. For more information, please click here.
Follow James R. Doty, M.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ccare
for people with fewer financial resources, this lack of connection, lack of mutual aid, social darwinism, blaming the victim, lack of a safety net, patronizing charity, and other symptoms of this collective epidemic, is even more severe and more threatening.
if the dr. doesn't do so already, perhaps he could drive a few miles to oakland and volunteer to provide vital medical care to people who don't have access to it, understanding that even his efforts are are a drop in the bucket of the vast human need even in the wealthiest nation on earth.
What's in it for me?
LOL
It depends on what you mean by 'general taxation'.
'... maybe you have your own private army to protect you.'
Taxation to support a national army is not theft. Members of the U.S. Congress may legally (and morally, IMHO) to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises to support a national army pursuant to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 12 of the United States Constitution:
'To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;'
-- http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
'Also, I'd be happy to be taxed for the health care of all, as I was when living abroad.'
The U.S. Constitution forbids elected federal representatives from collecting taxes for health care. Doing so is thus unequivocally illegal (as well as immoral).
'In the several countries I have lived in, I've never seen such eagerness to gain credit for charity, and the huge pre-eminence of sponsorship over giving for no reward, as we have here - even at small local charity levels.'
I've lived and worked in Germany for more than five years now. I notice no such difference.
'Apropos, reading per capita percentage of disposable income charitable donations in the developed world shows that we as individuals lag behind individuals in most countries where they also pay high taxes for health care and higher education.'
Cite your references please.
The Dalai Lama clearly did not have the US healthcare debate on his mind. Otherwise he might have added that compassion is also the only way to reign in healthcare costs.
Which is holy, when you adhere to the gospel of wealth.
Zowie! Talk about well connected!
The causes-
1. Childhood poverty...an extraordinary predictor of future health. Poverty should not be blamed on those who are poor. We have a system that creates generational poverty.
2. Creating a system that has chosen a pound of cure instead of an ounce of prevention and that pound of cure comes at an exponentially higher cost.
3. The creation of a healthcare industrial complex that promotes technologies and pharmaceuticals that are either minimally more effective or only as effective when compared to other interventions and much less cost.
Our future truly will require compassion for those who are less fortunate...
Of course evolution is assumed. How did it happen is the question.
"Somewhere in our evolutionary history, there were presumably similarly prodigious protohumans, produced by some accident of genetics or environment, whose greater intelligence gave them the edge over their less gifted peers. Today’s chimp prodigies do not seem to profit from their intelligence in the same way. Their society and environment do not reward it as ours did."
A question of intelligence
New Scientist 26 March 2012
Oh, that explains it.
In short, somewhere, in an unobserved evolutionary history, presumably, an accident of genetics or environment did something, perhaps developing a conscience, that internalized rules, generating “altruistic genes” that in turn produced true altruism, leading apes down a path that led to us humans with our intelligence, virtue and morality. To call evolutionary answers “hard wired” is being truly altruistic. That, in and of itself, is evidence that altruism and intelligence are not products of material processes of selection and “fortuitous” accident, but of design. It follows logically that it is neither virtuous nor sensible to think otherwise.
For more informations, ask your dog
What?
And how did you determine that?
How can you determine that?
Did you place new borns in a vacume and let them go it alone to adult hood?
There is no way to establish compassion as an innate of man like eating, walking, etc.
From birth the infant is shown compassion. They are fed and held. That is an outside influence on the child.
And like its mirror mercy, twice blessed.
"purpose and meaning."
Too far from the farm.
"Compassion is an instinct."
A veritable Unselfish Gene?
"the largest gathering of experts ever brought together on this topic"
should perhaps include Richard Dawkins. Offering both the opportunity for a new look, and the material for a new book?
by Eric A. Bryant
'Libertarians believe that the primary political vice is the initiation of force, fraud, or coercion to achieve political aims. As a result, we renounce the welfare state as an unjust system of forced charity. We do not believe (in terms of platform) that needy individuals have a right to be helped by the government or that other individuals have a political obligation to help them.
'But does that mean libertarians should give to private charity? The answer is: Yes.
'Libertarians should be charitable not because we have a duty to help those less fortunate than us. We should be charitable, ironically, for more selfish reasons. We should regularly give to charity in order to increase our membership and political influence, thereby bringing ourselves closer to the free society we want to live in.'
-- http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?topic=3983.0;wap2
" The great enemy of clear language is insincerity "
"the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?"
George Orwell