I read Rutger's book, I also read Ayn's books, I don't even think that there is a contradiction, if you assume that humankind is kind and has a natural tendency for kindness. Both books changed me in a way, I love them, both highly recommended if you ask me.
Humankind neither nasty nor brutish
31–40 of 109 posts
Re: Humankind neither nasty nor brutish
#32I think this article is rather unfairly quoting poor Hobbes out of context. Hobbes didn't say humankind was nasty and brutish, he said the life of man would be "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" in the absence of a community... Which is not contradicted by the examples in the article!
What Hobbes actually said: > To speak impartially, both sayings are very true; That Man to Man is a kind of God; and that Man to Man is an arrant Wolfe. The first is true, if we compare Citizens amongst themselves; and the second, if we compare Cities. In other words, within a group we often see niceness, and between groups we often see nastiness - both are parts of human nature.
The actual nasty, brutish, and short quotation:
> In such condition [the state of nature] there is no place for industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving, and removing, such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.
Re: Humankind neither nasty nor brutish
#33While reading this, I can't help but to hear Charlie Chaplin's Great Dictator final speech in the background of my mind: "... We want to live by each other’s happiness - not by each other’s misery. We don’t want to hate and despise one another. In this world there is room for everyone. And the good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way. Greed h…
> More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness.
The worst of deeds are done by those who think of themselves and their clan as the kind-gentle ones saving the world from evil [TM].
Re: Humankind neither nasty nor brutish
#34There is no contradiction. We can all be altruistic or nasty depending on the context. We are messy and complicated animals, and we cooperate or defect depending on many signals. For those interested in this topic in depth (not just anecdotes like in the article) I recommend Behave by Robert Sapolsky.
Re: Humankind neither nasty nor brutish
#35The deepest separation of labor is female and male. The female energy is associated with empathy for the child. Male energy is protecting territory.
Some combination of both these energies exist in all of us.
You can say humans have the capacity for love, and also acknowledge there are people out there who gain pleasure from power over others.
You cant say one is natural and the other is learned.
Even the people who gain pleasure in causing pain, are useful in the right situations. Hence the trope in fiction of the jailed entity being released to combat an even greater foe in a dire situation.
Re: Humankind neither nasty nor brutish
#36While reading this, I can't help but to hear Charlie Chaplin's Great Dictator final speech in the background of my mind: "... We want to live by each other’s happiness - not by each other’s misery. We don’t want to hate and despise one another. In this world there is room for everyone. And the good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way. Greed h…
The whole point of that Great Dictator's Speech is the beginning, the "I'm sorry, I don't want to be a dictator" part. We need fewer wannabe-great-dictators in the world, and more successful tribal leaders striving to unite people via voluntary consensus, tolerance and moderation. That's just as true today as it was in the bad old 1930s.
> tribal leaders striving to unite people via voluntary consensus, tolerance and moderation
'Citizen 99234832, we have received reports that suggest you are insufficiently consensual, tolerant and moderate. Please report to camp X101 for voluntary reeducation, or face the consequences.'
Re: Humankind neither nasty nor brutish
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
...and the article has a direct response to your first part: > He suggests that people will indeed do nasty things on a mass scale if they are convinced that it is for the greater good. It was not inherent nastiness that led to the Holocaust, Bregman suggests, but years of indoctrination. For your last point about people in poverty, I would point out that the global poverty has gone down dramatically during capitalis…
And yet he has no explanation for why people will torture other people, to the point of death, for getting quiz answers wrong. This kinda points to his hypothesis of these being outliers as being incorrect. The inherent selfishness, as he himself refers to, of humanity leads to the nasty and brutish behavior. > I would point out that the global poverty has gone down dramatically during capitalism's reign And yet the…
You want,... "not-rundown petite bourgeoisie"
But more than 7 billion people have to behave obey...
Let me think... huh...sounds... 'dystopian'...? P-:
Re: Humankind neither nasty nor brutish
#38All it takes is one narcissist to ruin things for everybody else.
Re: Humankind neither nasty nor brutish
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
What Hobbes actually said: > To speak impartially, both sayings are very true; That Man to Man is a kind of God; and that Man to Man is an arrant Wolfe. The first is true, if we compare Citizens amongst themselves; and the second, if we compare Cities. In other words, within a group we often see niceness, and between groups we often see nastiness - both are parts of human nature.
It's a pretty succinct description of the two sides of tribalism.
To have a We, you need a They.
An alien threat would be the best thing ever for human cooperation. I'm not sure whether the aliens need to be real, as long as they feel real.
Re: Humankind neither nasty nor brutish
#40Seems to focus way too much on the bystander effect as a straw man example of "human evil". A much better picture of human evil would come from studying war rape, especially that of a victorious army. Any victorious army. Think Soviets in Berlin, Japanese in China, during WWII. The English civil wars were full of it as observed by Hobbes. Furthermore, it is ubiquitous throughout history. Any human convinced of their…
Americans in Japan raping Japanese would be an easy example to look at as it still happens, but I doubt anyone would be allowed to.