David Brooks: "The Social Animal: The Hidden Sources of Love, Character and Achievement"
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-03-10/david-brooks-social-animal-hidden-sources-love-character-and-achievement
David Brooks
David Burnett
For generations, American culture has celebrated the power of the individual. But recent brain research suggests the idea of community may be more important to humans than previously thought. Simply put, we’re not rational animals, we’re social animals. David Brooks, New York Times columnist and author of Bobos In Paradise, spent three years culling research on sociology, neuroscience and philosophy to understand how emotions shape our lives. He explored how these findings might change the way we see ourselves, conduct business, manage relationships, and practice politics. David Brooks talks with Diane about why he believes humans crave contact and community above all else.
Guests
David Brooks
columnist with the "The New York Times" and author of "Bobos in Paradise."
Author Extra: David Brooks Answers Audience Questions
Q: Over a decade ago, I was adjunct faculty in a local Leadership program. While the program utilized a plethora of psychometric measures, the most convincing example of leadership behavior I witnessed was that of a young man who was one of 12 siblings. He actually anticipated the group's needs and appeared to do so with no ego motivations. Did you find that, culturally, we tend to rely on measures that have academic cache and dismiss the more obvious factors for leadership, career preferences, etc. such as birth order, family size and the like? - From Shela in Arlington
A: I’d say we have two different sets of measures in society. College admissions committees rely on grades and SAT scores and some people judge others by what college they went to. But the things that get you in to the Ivy League are not necessarily the things that help you excel in life, or even make a lot of money. There’s been a fair bit of research on this and there is a low correlation between attending a prestigious college and making a lot of money. Employers are looking for exactly those leadership skills you describe. It’s just that they have a hard time defining it. And if this is true in the workplace, it’s even more true in other parts of life, where people like the young man you describe are rare and invaluable.
Q: I have two related questions. Has Mr. Brooks read "The Politics of Denial" by Milburn and Conrad? This book highlights the power of parenting on the formation of conservative political views. Second question is has his research enlightened him to how early development creates adult political identity? - From Fred in Phoenix
A: I have not read that book, but I’m a little suspicious of a lot of the explanations of that sort I have read, linking, say, authoritarian fathers to political conservatism. I’d say where you grow up matters more than parenting style. People who grow up in Wyoming are more conservative than people who grow up in San Francisco. Any difference in parenting styles are probably washed away by the larger cultural differences. Jonathan Haidt of the University of Virginia has done a lot of work trying to isolate different political value systems. His work is the best I’ve seen.
Q: More and more schools are changing from alternative education programs to computer-based learning due to tightening budgets. Many alternative education students are the very ones who need small group learning and building student/teacher bonds. Regular high school hasn't worked for them. Their social interactions are less than productive. Putting them in front of computers seems counter productive if our goal is to graduate socially appropriate, emotionally healthy, productive problem solvers. Thoughts? - From Penny in Michigan
A: I’m hopeful that we can combine the two techniques. That is, many companies are trying to devise computer programs that will tailor information transmission to each student’s learning approach. Then teachers would be free to move around from student to student coaching them as they run into difficulty. That may allow for more interaction, not less.
Audio Excerpt: The Social Animal
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
I look forward to tomorrow's program and will be reading David Brooks' book. Please ask him this....
"...moral connections over monetary need"...indeed! I think you mean monetary GREED...not monetary NEED.
As a (now retired) special-ed teacher, I loved what I did and I felt I made a difference in those children's lives. I certainly was not in it for the money! It's true that teachers don't generate a monetary profit, but are they worth less to society than, say, a hedge fund manager? What does David think of the right-wing's vilification of teachers and their right to a liveable income?
David's book seems relies much on current scientific findings regarding the brain and behavior. As I am sure David would acknowledge, using science--while surely of great vlaue--can lead us to reduce our internal experience to the material world (such as brain function). With this in mind, I am wondering about the affect of David's journey on his inner spiritual life. Has David become a bit more mystical?
Thanks,
Ron from Arlington, VA
As in his BONOBO book David Brooks continues to chronicle the entitled lives of his immediate experience, the upper middle and lower wealthy classes. Too much of his observations are "special case."
I do read his books and columns, watch his punditry, to comprehend my opponents, and he is a clever one. Recently I have been disappointed as he has redescended to a "talking points" approach under the P-tardy offensive in progress. He had previously conceded that there might be intelligent life below the $250K a year barrier, but he has now reneged. I hoped he'd mature at the New York Times but he has regressed. No surprise, since Paul Krugman is backsliding too.
Maybe they expect that justice and fairness are lost causes and they just want to be on the winning side with their masters- the Oligarchy. If you keep putting quarters in the war machine you're gonna get a giant Libya, David. The problem of our failing empire is not one of citizen character, but of global corporate hijack, and you helped.
I am mystified as to why anyone would take anything this man has to write seriously. He's a courtier and flatterer. I read the excerpt in the New Yorker. Is there a need for popular science to be popularized further? Lazy, lazy, lazy.
I am looking forward to listening to David Brooks and reading his new book after watching the Charlie Rose interview. However, when I Google the title, this comes up: The social animal / Elliot Aronson
Why choose the title of an existing book?
Don't you love his idea of a "composure class"? Uh, Bobo-- no mention that sometimes it is a hell of a lot easier to remain composed. You know, for some a speeding ticket may be devastating-- the difference between paying the rent or not. For others it is not even the tiniest blip on their radar. But, you know, that's neither here nor there. Obviously the composure class does not have such worries because they are innately competent and composed.
David Brooks is one of my favorite conservatives. Although I disagree with him on many...mmm most issues, I enjoy his discussions on the PBS news hour with Mark Shields. They spar but oh soooo good naturedly.He has a very elegant way of putting forth his point of view, that even I, as a liberal am never put off by him. Many on the Fox Channel can learn from him. If only many more conservatives were like him!
Haven't read his book, but will do so as soon as I can.
A study from Harvard University equates Stress with discontinuous attention practices. Another study from Harvard University found that the practice of Meditation modulates the differences between the relaxation response of the para-sympathetic nervous system and the fight-or-flight response of the sympathetic nervous system. Since attention is discontinuous between the responses of the nervous systems, Meditation alleviates Stress.
I learned in Speech Comm that Self-Esteem is my story about life. High Self-Esteem is the Truth. Everything else is a lie. Low Self-Esteem is the same as Stress. Since the Truth is what we agree upon, Meditation would facilitate Teamwork.
there is a beautiful video on youtube of mr. rogers addressing congress in the early 1960s regarding funding for public television. he successfully appeals to the emotional life of the congressman by thoughtfully sharing his feelings about his work with children... there is a transformation in the room. i wish we could return to some sense of open-heartedness in politics.
thank you.
Diane! Enough with the softballs! Where's the ONE most SERIOUS question: "David, how do you square this thoughtful approach to human values -- love, emotion, intution -- with the contradictory conservative beliefs you typically promote?"
I am very afraid to end up homeless if the republicans get the presidentcy. I think Boener cries to stir emotion in his followers. Most people who see someone cry are very moved emotionally. It's a tactic.
I'm glad he said it's tribal warfare, the rich vs the poor.
I've been talking to people and more folks than not don't even follow politics. there a lot of sleeping people out there.
I wish you would have , I can't remember his name, but the author of 'Jesus rode a donkey". So many Christians believe you can't be a Christian and a democrat.
NPR is great, but there sure have been a lot more conservites on lately.
David, great show! I am going out tomorrow to find & buy your book. Many things you have written and spoken of today on Diane's show are the pillars I grew up with & hold to many of them still, as hard as that can be in the age of anger and intolerance that surrounds us these days. Your book should be mandatory reading for all! But then who am I to dictate...?
David and Diane, thank you for this particular program.
Regarding David's comment about not quite understanding why some people are more emotional or less so, may be answered by the studies by David W. Kiersey's "Please Understand Me II....". In the book he types people into four main groups and each main type with four subgroups. The basis of the distinction is on how we use "words" and how we use "tools". We use words either "concretely" or "abstractly". We use tools either "pragmatically" or "cooperatively". This leads to four intellectual types: Tactical, Logistical, Strategic, and Diplomatic. And he shows the interdepency of all these types and how they work or have difficulty working together. There is much more in the book than what I describe, but knowledge of the types and being able to discern them from their behavior and speech has made a very positive contribution to me in relationship building in all areas of my life: marriage, children, friends, work.
I highly recommend it for increasing our understanding of ourselves and of others.
Thanks again for your program airing this subject and thanks to you David for your book. I am a regular reader, listener and fan of you both. We desparately need more rational voices in the public forum.
Paul B
I am absolutely tickled to hear Mr. Brooks' observations on empathy and reason not being mutually exclusive. I am in animal care, and have been dismayed to find a prevalent opinion that having enthusiasm or a personal interest are undesirable because they make professionalism and objective thinking impossible. I find it to be quite the opposite as long as there is discipline.
Will be getting a copy - good luck to you!
I listened to you with great interest today and can't wait to read my new book. However, David mentioned at the end of today's show a book that would greatly interest scholars and artists, a book that discusses their breakthroughs. And I didn't get the name. I've gone to Amazon to find it, but there are a number of books with a similar name--Uncertainty or Certainty. Can you give me the full name. I want to read it.
It's safe to say that current research and insight into the relation between cognition and emotion is an expansion of an important area of inquiry that's been with us for a long, long time. (Compare and contrast Locke and Hume, f'rinstance.)
We're returning - now armed with behavioral and biological research - to an understanding that the only real "objectivity" in human affairs is one that includes human emotion as an object of rational contemplation.
A paradox, I guess: the habitual attempt to exclude emotional reality and to admit only cognition is hardly "objective," but is itself an irrational emotional response to human complexity.
David Brooks' book looks very interesting and the discussion today was edifying, but I found it surreal to hear David Brooks expressing these views about emotion and tribal warfare and so on, seeing as he popularized the red state-blue state stereotypes that pervade political perceptions, and which have contributed greatly to our current combative political atmosphere. I'm glad he's seen the light, I certainly wish more conservatives would shift their emphasis to the ones that Mr Brooks has adopted.
Fascinating interview....I thought your comments about the Obama's strange ..most would consider them pretty emotionless...Not everyone who listens viscerally hates conservatives !
@reaben I believe the reference was to "On certainty" by Ludwig Wittgenstein.
I believe the reference was to "On certainty" by Ludwig Wittgenstein. Here's a link to the book on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Certainty-Ludwig-Wittgenstein/dp/0631169407/ref=sr....