Human Nature

[SacRedMan]

The most people I argued with think this is Human Nature: struggling for money and power. Well, what was Human Nature before the invention of money and civilisations? What we see is, when we compare the West with tribes in, for example, Brazil, we see that the material conditions we live in mostly depend our Nature. Indeed, here, under our capitalism, people are almost brainwashed' to struggle for power and money. We think we understand Human Nature and its greediness. But that's how Human Nature is in the West.

There is no universal definition of Human Nature.

[trivas7]

The biggest gripe I have, of late, is this pervasive notion that human nature can somehow be changed / removed by virtue of the social establishments -- that is to say that natural "greed" or "selfishness" or "patriotism" or "jealousies" simply disappear when people are living in a happy, egalitarian-like society. And I've yet to meet somebody from this political mindset that does not believe this to be an absolute truth.

Indeed, scholars like Steven Pinker and Richard Dawkins persuade me to believe that there are limits to which human nature can be bent. Skeptic Michael Shermer also has written about the evolutionary/biological limits of human nature.

While this is not damning to the credibility of socialism, in the light of history it certainly gives pause.

[danyboy27]

Human nature if it really exist, is something that is constantly changing, its not something that is completely set in stone.

If human nature was something that could not be altered, chattel slavery, human sacrifice and rape would still be widely accepted by the world today

[trivas7]

If human nature was something that could not be altered, chattel slavery, human sacrifice and rape would still be widely accepted by the world today

I don't understand how this follows. Even Marxists admit that even today human beings traffic in (sex) slavery, (wage) chattel and discarding of other human beings.

[Rafiq]

I don't understand how this follows. Even Marxists admit that even today human beings traffic in (sex) slavery, (wage) chattel and discarding of other human beings.

It's true, but traditionally what has been the Marxist line was that the existence of these things were not some kind of expression of an inherit savagery or human nature, rather they are merely a reflection of material conditions that within them carry a potential or manifestation that is greater than itself (a society without slavery could unintentionally, through a class conflict, bring about the existence of slavery and so on). I don't think humans are naturally against or in favor of things like exploitation, but I don't think a human nature is something buried within us that needs to be surpressed. In actuality things that are deemed a human nature are really an expression of material and social conditions external from clean, pure human thought.

[RGacky3]

To say there is no human nature is a little bit wrong imo. There is, but it shifts and adapts overtime. There are general human tendancies that can be studied and applied with accuracy, but they should be seen as adaptions.

[DinodudeEpic]

I agree, a utopiac society of perfect equality is impossible.


However, I don't want that.

I want a free society with equal RIGHTS. The goal of socialism, at least Liberal Socialism, is to establish a democratic and free society in both politics and economy.

This will naturally lead to equality, as shown in political democracies compared with dictatorships and monarchies.

[TheRedAnarchist23]

If this had not been already spammed by others I could accuratly explain human behavior.

I hope rafiq doesn't see this...

[RGacky3]

I want a free society with equal RIGHTS. The goal of socialism, at least Liberal Socialism, is to establish a democratic and free society in both politics and economy.

This will naturally lead to equality, as shown in political democracies compared with dictatorships and monarchies.

There is nothing more egotistical and silly than trying to invent your own ideology, which is really just a mainstream idealogy with a different name.

[#FF0000]

There is nothing more egotistical and silly than trying to invent your own ideology, which is really just a mainstream idealogy with a different name.

dinodude needs to tattoo this on his head and live in a house of mirrors until it sinks in.

[Monkeyboy]

I'm very interested in both sociology and evolutionary psychology. Sociology is basically nurture while evolutionary psychology is basically nature. I think both can explain mankind.

I haven't read anything about us being greedy. However of course we are programmed to reproduce our genes, so we are biased to do that. I think that doesn't imply we are greedy, but yes one mate preference of women (David M. Buss) is rescources, so being greedy might help in our capitalist society to aquire rescources. This of course can lead to conflict, to back communism, with equality all males would have about the same change to reproduce, so less conflict.

One controversial evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa (yes he says stupid things, but also some good in my opinion) said marriage reduces crime because males that would otherwise have no mates because of polygamy. That seems like a good explanation, I would think males would take more risk if they know their changes of finding a mate are low, so they resort to crime. Other males who want to have more mates, will have a greedy power hungry strategy.

I do believe we can live in a more equal society. Someone made the examples that some primitive hunter gatherer societies already do. Yes, we are selfish, we want to spread our own genes. If we can do that, than what would be the problem for a equel society?

A good term that comes to mind for this thread is: kin selection. But I believe that can be overcome as well.