Interview: Benno Tuchschmid
Martin Hartmann (53) is an expert on one of the most formative topics of our day: trust. Hartmann wrote an award-winning book on this shortly before the start of the pandemic. We meet him in the lobby of a pretty hotel right on the Reuss in Lucerne. Hartmann is a professor of practical philosophy. In the middle of a conversation about the disturbed relationship of trust between lovers, between politics and citizens, a hotel employee begins to work with a canister of fuel on the artificial fireplace. Trust can be an abstract topic – but often it is also very specific.
Is Corona also a crisis of trust?
Martin Hartmann: For those who didn’t trust the state anyway, yes. Covid is a booster for distrust.
That is a minority in Switzerland.
Yes, the majority trust the federal institutions in their basic stance. However, they are confused by the information policy – and this also results in their trust being shaken. I can explain it to you using an example that has nothing to do with Covid.
Practical philosopher
Martin Hartmann (53), born in Hamburg, has been Professor of Philosophy with a focus on Practical Philosophy at the University of Lucerne since 2011. His book “Trust: The Invisible Power” (S. Fischer) was awarded the Science Book of the Year 2021 award in Austria. Hartmann is the father of two daughters.
Martin Hartmann (53), born in Hamburg, has been Professor of Philosophy with a focus on Practical Philosophy at the University of Lucerne since 2011. His book “Trust: The Invisible Power” (S. Fischer) was awarded the Science Book of the Year 2021 award in Austria. Hartmann is the father of two daughters.
Willingly.
I am basically satisfied with SBB – much more satisfied than with Deutsche Bahn. But when there is a delay, I often find the announcements more confusing than helpful, and I’ve also seen them actually being misleading. That is why I find SBB reliable overall, but no longer really trust their crisis communication.
What does that mean in relation to the pandemic?
A bad information policy can endanger a trust that is inherently stable. At first they said: boost it, six months after the first vaccination. It’s been four months now. So was six months wrong? The citizens think: on what basis did you make the first decision?
Should politics never change its mind?
Yes, but it has to say why – and it doesn’t do enough in Switzerland either. In return, as citizens, we have to learn to admit mistakes to politicians.
I checked the train connection again this morning, although I almost never have bad experiences with the SBB. Probably because I read a lot about dwindling customer satisfaction and delays. Is the atmosphere of trust more important than personal experience?
Yes, it is often like that. If we’re being honest, we usually don’t have the expertise to check whether an institution like SBB or the BAG is trustworthy or not. Our social environment can help us with this assessment. This is usually not a problem.
But?
In a culture of suspicion, it is difficult to hold onto an experience-based opinion. All experiments show that. This is why some consider vaccinations dangerous, even though they have never had bad experiences with them – simply because it is repeated around them.
In Switzerland there was a lot of talk this year about the divided society …
I found and find that exaggerated. Unvaccinated and vaccinated people still have a lot in common.
Really?
I was in Hamburg a few weeks ago and there was a large anti-corona measures demonstration. I looked at it, read the posters. A wide range of the population was present. I suspect I would have agreed with most of them on many topics: for example, climate change.
I’m sorry, what?
I don’t want to gloss over anything, of course there are people who have disconnected in their radicalism – with whom it is no longer possible to talk. Also in Switzerland. But the vaccine-skeptical people I know personally are not radical on all points. I find their opinion wrong, and I am disappointed that they misunderstand science. But the worst thing we can do is stop talking to each other.
It’s easy to say. Many people have just noticed over the festive season how Covid is dividing families.
It’s insanely hard to keep the conversation going. Because there is a lot at stake in this crisis: who is allowed to visit which bars. Whether someone can inject something or not. But I believe that the trenches do not yet encompass all subject areas.
How do you manage to get back together in a family that has fallen out over Covid?
In my private life I would first try to look for similarities. What do you share, what connects you? Then hopefully everyone will also notice that there are uncertainties on both sides.
What do you mean by that?
For example, I can well understand that some people doubt whether they want their 5-year-old children to be vaccinated. That is completely legitimate, here one must not judge, but must explain.
But the opposite is happening: When it comes to Covid, everyone seems to know everything.
Exactly, unfortunately we find it difficult to admit uncertainty. We should take science as an example, where knowledge is only valid until it is refuted.
Why do we find it difficult to admit uncertainties?
We always talk about trust and how important it is. But at the same time we are also afraid of it because it makes us vulnerable. Maybe that’s why we always pretend we know everything.
The number of cases is exploding. In this pandemic, Swiss politicians have always relied heavily on personal responsibility. Did she trust the citizens too much?
I can understand that Switzerland went this way. And I wouldn’t say it totally failed either. It should not be forgotten that a majority of people in Switzerland are also vaccinated. But if the situation worsens, you will have to react.
The boys still have a low vaccination rate. How so?
The young people initially supported the measures in solidarity – but were disappointed with what came back.
Can you be more specific?
The 21 to 25-year-olds feel most disadvantaged by the crisis, as figures from the BAG show. Unfortunately, that has still not really reached politics. The old people just have a better lobby. It is clear to me: So far, we have not paid enough attention to the effects on young people during the pandemic. And now the adolescent psychiatric departments are overburdened.
In your book “Trust” you also describe how young adults have increasing problems in having serious relationships – that is, trusting.
For many young people, every relationship is subject to the possibility of looking for something new if it doesn’t work out. This is an effect of dating apps like Tinder. A possible alternative is always waiting there.
And that affects the way boys have relationships?
It changes their attitudes towards relationships. There is no will to be binding. The sociologist Eva Illouz confirms in her studies that not only do young people jump faster when things get more serious.
Does love go without trust?
No, trust defines love.
Why should one surrender oneself to the possibility of being injured?
Because you can win a lot – and not in an economic sense. Stability, a home, physical intimacy. By the way, sex in particular needs a lot of trust. But the innermost core of trust is freedom.
You have to explain that.
Freedom is not easy to do what you want. Freedom is a kind of gift that others give to us and we to others – we renounce control and observation. Not because you can’t, but because you don’t want to. We should also keep this in mind in this Covid crisis: every freedom is always granted by others – and not simply taken individually.
Is there a society without trust?
My father fled the GDR. That was at least a low-trust system.
So societies cannot survive without trust?
They may survive, but they are not good companies.
Martin Hartmann, “Trust – The Invisible Power”, S. Fischer