People were forbidden to think for themselves without realizing that our subconscious has a huge amount of information that allows us to decide, information that goes way beyond our rational thinking. We have discovered that intuition is a source of knowledge, which is more important than reason. We should trust our intuition even if we don’t have all the information. We talk about learning but we should be unlearning all the things we have learned, all the nonsense we have acquired for many years which keeps us away from trusting ourselves and our senses.
Another thing that has to be discarded is competition, in favor of genuine teamwork or altruism. We have to change, even beyond the search for happiness, just to make things work, because what worked for our parents, a system based on academics, has lost all its power. Another thing that has to be improved is our capacity to focus in the midst of so many foundations we have created. People have to learn to concentrate their attention on only one thing, the thing they find most interesting.
BW: Are things changing?
EP: I think that the application of emotional learning in the schools is the pending revolution we have, and it’s already starting. It is going to be possible basically because of three things. One is, as I was saying, that we know that the subconscious is an unlimited source of information. The second reason is that, as was demonstrated in an experiment at Columbia University, we know that the individual experience of each person can influence that person’s brain structure or genetics.
We are done with the old debate of nature vs. nurture. We are programmed, yes, but to be unique, thanks to our individual experience. And the third reason that allows the effective application of emotional learning in schools is to have discovered the window of time. Another experiment [at] Harvard has proven that we can distinguish which is the best age to teach emotional knowledge and management. This is between four and nine years old.
BW: And creativity? How can we grow it?
EP: We have seen how our current education based on the needs of the industrial revolution does not consider creativity at all. They thought that through the IQ [test], we could measure people’s intelligence without realizing that we were ignoring creativity. Another universal consensus these days is to get this contraction over with. It is painful to see how children are so creative, and we see that creativity diminishing as they grow up until they become almost like robots.
BW: Are all the answers inside ourselves?
EP: Knowledge is almost a mathematical concept. It’s very related first to our perception of the world, then to our interiorizing of this perception and then throwing this vision back to the world in order to affirm it or invalidate it. So it’s very difficult to say that knowledge is the fruit of internal experience exclusively.
BW: There is an explosion of science and technology in the popular culture. What are the positive and negative effects of that?
EP: None are negative. Because what is characterizing the modern times is the abandonment of dogma, of knowledge that is not proven, in favor of a quest to get closer to the truth. Science proposes a thesis and then tries to prove it in reality, while dogmatic thinking not only does not search for proof but it’s also not ready to change its idea or opinion — something that even monkeys are ready to do. Science has an incredible capacity to keep doubting, for instance something that was established, that was considered principle at one time is soon enough put into question.
I still think that the role of science is still very small compared to the rest of things. The part of reality that we have been able to prove or validate is still infinitely small related to the rest of things. But it’s in this struggle between science and a different vision where much of our future knowledge lies. It’s clear that part of this dogmatic thinking has for a long time sustained the search for reality, or at least for balance. But it’s also evident that, little by little, science will have a bigger role and dogma a smaller one.
