On Mon, 6 Dec 1999, Katha Pollitt wrote:
> That human nature is "essentially benevolent, cooperative and social"
> (if social means something other than "unlike cats and tigers,live
> together in groups") seems to me pure speculation. How odd that we can
> bash the idea that WOMEN are 'essentially benevolent" (peaceful,
> child-oriented, cooperative etc) -- but accept the idea that all human
> beings are so!
> People "essentially benevolent"? As Woody Allen said, the lion can lie
> down with the lamb, but the lamb won't get much sleep.
>
> katha
What fascinates me about human nature is how every society tends to see its own arrangements as a clear manifestation of human nature. Thus headhunter tribes' belief in innate cruelty, the common belief in our capitalist societies about competitive or selfish instincts, etc.
Are human beings "essentially benevolent"? Hard to say. Is human nature malleable enough to create more peaceful societies than the one we're living in? Yes, the anthropological evidence on that is pretty clear.
Funny how even anarchists try to provide rhetorical weight to their arguments by making reference to nature and biology.
Miles