It always amazed me that someone would think some primitive person would invent a better arrow and then someone else would want it and neither barter for it or simply take it by force.
Specialization of labor is what spurred the great technological movements of humanity, not the random tinkerings of serfs (or more laughably, utopian-era communists) who then willing gave of themselves their abilities to all who simply asked.
There has always been human nature. The plea that a type of government can curtail that is laughable.
"Human nature" is generally used as an apology for violence and greed, assuming they are inescapable features of human beings.
It is a lazy term that does not bear inspection. If violence is inherent in our 'nature', why is it that soldiers, when exposed to violent trauma, come back broken husks of human beings, committing suicide at higher rates? This is not just a feature of modern warfare, the human casualties of war have long piled up when the troops come home - Civil war, 1st World War, 2nd World War, Korean war, Vietnam, GWOT - vets have always had high post-war psychological casualties. It has even been written about since ancient times. But why, if violence is 'in our nature', are our soldiers so ill equipped to deal with the consequences of violence? If violence and killing is human nature, wouldn't we be genetically equipped to deal with violent traumatic events?
The truth is that human nature is varied. Most people are empaths, who are strongly disposed against killing. Any kind of communally/tribally evolved animal obviously has a strong evolutionary incentive to have most of the members of the tribe be empaths. But, since prehistory, it is obvious that a large amount of killing had to be done, mostly the hunting and killing of animals. So any tribe would benefit by having a fraction of its members well disposed towards killing without suffering from emotional distress. Unfortunately these killers also turn on targets of opportunity in neighboring human tribes. I submit to you that this is the evolutionary utility of the small percent of psychopaths and sociopaths.
This is one of the main problems of society. We no longer really need killers - yet the people who lack empathy are often those that climb their way up into leadership positions and make decisions about launching wars. In addition to managing the distribution of resources for the benefit of the greatest good, society also needs to manage its sociopaths and make sure their traits are employed towards productive ends, rather than the practice of killing.
I could write about greed being 'human nature' too, but I think we all know enough people in our lives that are quite happy with just getting by. I personally know several people who are quite talented, but instead of going for a job that provides the maximum paycheck, have elected to do something that gives them fulfillment.
There is quite a bit here, but your summation, domesticated humans are somehow preferable is sad, frankly. There are many people that work for maximum paycheck, particularly in their preferred fields -nothing wrong with that at all.
I also know a few very talented ex-McKinsey types who have gone both ways - back into the consulting management field or away into the woods, the former are sort of like the ex-military PTSD people. I know ex-MDs who would never have their kids go into medicine, but who have ventured back when given the opportunity. There are all kinds of people in the world and keeping the ones that would take from you, either by force or passive-aggressively, say via an elected goon squad need to be kept in check. That takes all sorts of people to accomplish, too.
Moreover, competitive people are not necessarily evil. Unfortunately, parents have been de-emphasizing winning and losing as some kind of good thing - we are seeing the results of a generation of that crap and it is lame and not good for society overall. You need to learn how to win and lose, not simply how to manage your caloric intake until you die. There needs to be risks taken, for the advancement of all of society.
To think that a bunch of aimless, self-interested, sheeple is the goal of society is very very wrong.
It always amazed me that someone would think some primitive person would invent a better arrow and then someone else would want it and neither barter for it or simply take it by force.
Specialization of labor is what spurred the great technological movements of humanity, not the random tinkerings of serfs (or more laughably, utopian-era communists) who then willing gave of themselves their abilities to all who simply asked.
There has always been human nature. The plea that a type of government can curtail that is laughable.
"Human nature" is generally used as an apology for violence and greed, assuming they are inescapable features of human beings.
It is a lazy term that does not bear inspection. If violence is inherent in our 'nature', why is it that soldiers, when exposed to violent trauma, come back broken husks of human beings, committing suicide at higher rates? This is not just a feature of modern warfare, the human casualties of war have long piled up when the troops come home - Civil war, 1st World War, 2nd World War, Korean war, Vietnam, GWOT - vets have always had high post-war psychological casualties. It has even been written about since ancient times. But why, if violence is 'in our nature', are our soldiers so ill equipped to deal with the consequences of violence? If violence and killing is human nature, wouldn't we be genetically equipped to deal with violent traumatic events?
The truth is that human nature is varied. Most people are empaths, who are strongly disposed against killing. Any kind of communally/tribally evolved animal obviously has a strong evolutionary incentive to have most of the members of the tribe be empaths. But, since prehistory, it is obvious that a large amount of killing had to be done, mostly the hunting and killing of animals. So any tribe would benefit by having a fraction of its members well disposed towards killing without suffering from emotional distress. Unfortunately these killers also turn on targets of opportunity in neighboring human tribes. I submit to you that this is the evolutionary utility of the small percent of psychopaths and sociopaths.
This is one of the main problems of society. We no longer really need killers - yet the people who lack empathy are often those that climb their way up into leadership positions and make decisions about launching wars. In addition to managing the distribution of resources for the benefit of the greatest good, society also needs to manage its sociopaths and make sure their traits are employed towards productive ends, rather than the practice of killing.
I could write about greed being 'human nature' too, but I think we all know enough people in our lives that are quite happy with just getting by. I personally know several people who are quite talented, but instead of going for a job that provides the maximum paycheck, have elected to do something that gives them fulfillment.
There is quite a bit here, but your summation, domesticated humans are somehow preferable is sad, frankly. There are many people that work for maximum paycheck, particularly in their preferred fields -nothing wrong with that at all.
I also know a few very talented ex-McKinsey types who have gone both ways - back into the consulting management field or away into the woods, the former are sort of like the ex-military PTSD people. I know ex-MDs who would never have their kids go into medicine, but who have ventured back when given the opportunity. There are all kinds of people in the world and keeping the ones that would take from you, either by force or passive-aggressively, say via an elected goon squad need to be kept in check. That takes all sorts of people to accomplish, too.
Moreover, competitive people are not necessarily evil. Unfortunately, parents have been de-emphasizing winning and losing as some kind of good thing - we are seeing the results of a generation of that crap and it is lame and not good for society overall. You need to learn how to win and lose, not simply how to manage your caloric intake until you die. There needs to be risks taken, for the advancement of all of society.
To think that a bunch of aimless, self-interested, sheeple is the goal of society is very very wrong.