Are we innately selfish?

If we were, then the progression towards a society free of inequality becomes ever more problematic. By assuming that human beings by nature are competitive, aggressive, and self-interested, it becomes 'easy' to explain the issues and inequalities existing in society.

Karl Marx didn't think so. Marx viewed human beings as self-reflective about the world around us. More importantly, Marx explained that human beings are not innately selfish, although often times they can appear to be (Piekosz). Marx saw inequality in the world through the lens of economic production- explaining that human nature is extremely social, and that the social consciousness can be altruistic. Due to this social nature, human beings create things through ideas and actions. In this sense, human beings also produce for the function of group survival, and without these social inventions, human beings would be extinct.

He believed that humans are not equipped as social beings to act and interact in any other way, as the theory of species being imply that we are social by nature rather than individualistic (Piekosz). Marx expanded that the process of economic exchange teaches humans to be self-centered, self-serving, and act out of self-interest (Marx), (Piekosz). This fundamental Marxist logic is necessary to the idea of economic determinism- that the economic determines all levels of inequality within society. For Marx, the inevitable result of Communism is the prophesized solution to individualized and self-centered existence.

Today, it is not uncommon for people to see the prevalence of selfishness and attribute it to our nature. But if humans are innately selfish and competitive, what would explain cooperative and altruistic tendencies? It is then not a sound argument to only examine the selfishness prevalent across culture and societies without examining the altruism that is also prevalent. Existing peaceful and non-violent societies actively defends this statement.

Bruce Bonta of Penn State University writes that children in non-violent societies lack competitive games and are made to feel no more important than others. The peaceful societies devalue achievement because it leads to competition and aggressiveness- which in their view leads to violence, “The rituals of such societies reinforce cooperation, harmonious beliefs and behaviours (Bonta).” From this anthropological perspective, one can derive that cooperation and competitiveness are both bound to cultural factors rather than just genetic makeup. By the same token, even if humans are innately selfish, the existence of peaceful societies goes to illustrate that selfish tendency can be devalued and effectively controlled.

Paleoanthropologist, Richard Leakey, contends that humans are innately cooperative and food-sharing. Contrary to the violent images depicting cave men as violent and aggressive, no weapons of death and destruction have been found, “the evidence for aggression and violence does not exist (Detjen).” Matt Ridley, an accomplished scientist, also asserts that humans possess a cooperative nature with an instinct for reciprocity. Ridley states, “People are not naturally uncooperative and predatory towards each other. Nature- our genes- does much to keep us civil (Boudreaux, Ridley).” Hegemonic masculinity is yet another contemporary example of how competitiveness, aggression, and individualism are valued. Hegemonic masculinity privileges those who possess normative ideals and simultaneously oppresses those who don’t, “manhood is equated with power, over women, and over other men (Kimmel).” This cultural relation and social construct enforces a greater degree of patriarchy, alienation, and social inequality.

It is worth noting that in any perspective when discussing human nature, both selfishness and cooperation can be socially constructed. In relevance to societal value, Helen Fisher, an anthropologist from Rutgers University, draw an enlightening reference, “For millions of years, women worked… Double income family was the rule. Women were relatively much more powerful than they are today- almost as powerful as men overall (economically, socially, sexually). But as we moved into the agricultural revolution, male roles became much more important than female roles. (Fisher)”

Through Fisher’s statement, it is apparent that the culture and social relations today are not caused by innate selfishness. Rather, it is caused by ideas and events that have completely changed the dynamics of human relations. In the context of oppression, intersectionality theory holds that gender, class, and race have interlocking relations in the dynamics of social, cultural, economic, and political contexts (Stasiulis). This means that oppressive processes do not exist as an independent source. In light of anthropology findings and the emergence of intersectionality, it is of little surprise to realize that the inequality generated in the industrial revolution, and Marx’s views on human nature, are fundamental building blocks to his theories.

Although Marx has been critiqued for being reductive and naive, these contemporary examples illustrate why Marx’s ideas on human nature can and should be appreciated. For Marx, the inevitable result of Communism (contrary to conventional belief, China and North Korea is not a representation of Marx's communist ideals) is the prophesized solution to individualized and self-centered existence. Marx implies that because of human nature, communism is the natural and the inevitable. Although his Communism prophecy has not and may not ever come to reality, it is plausible to think that human nature is not innately selfish.

Thanks for reading =).

References

Bonta, B.Cooperation and competition in peaceful societies Psychological Bulletin , v.121 , p.299 , 1997.

Boudreaux, D. J. (1997). Matt ridley (1997) the origins of virtue. Constitutional Political Economy, 8(4), 359-361. http://search.proquest.com/docview/880349513

Detjen, J. (1986, Nov 08). Challenging the origins of mankind. Philadelphia Inquirer, pp. B.1. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/293923950

Fisher, H. (2003, May 24). Human nature: A century for women? New Scientist, 178, 53-53. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/200422962?accountid=14771

Kimmel, M. (2002). Masculinity as homophobia: Fear, shame and silence in the construction of gender identity. In P. Murphy (Ed.), Feminism & Masculinities (pp. 182-99). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Marx, Karl “The Communist Manifesto in Marx/Engels Selected Works”, Volume One, pp 98-137. 1969 Progress Publishers.

Piekosz, Agata. “What is Inequality?” Lecture. University of Toronto. July 2012.

Stasiulis, D. (1999). Feminist intersectional theorizing. In V. Zawilski (Ed.), Inequality in Canada: A Reader on the Intersections of Gender, Race, and Class (2nd ed.) (pp 25-47).Don Mills: Oxford University Press.

Pain

Pain is an integral part to our lives and a rather natural reaction is to turn to pessimism in the face of emotional pain.

So many times I found myself asking: "Why?"

But through these difficult times, I came to certain realizations:

Through difficult times, we can better appreciate more walks of life. Through adversity, we learn to appreciate the journeys of others more: how everyone has fought their own battles in their own way to make it to where they are today. Understanding this sheds a more beautiful light towards humanity- also helping us to realize that we are not alone in most of our experiences.

We find courage through adversity. When we choose to accept failure, defeat, heartbreak, and learn to embrace our pain, we can often unfold our more compassionate self- forgiving those who have wronged us, misunderstood us, or misjudged us. The truth is, the most difficult part is not forgiving others, but rather, forgiving yourself.

Time and again, I am reminded that I am my own worst enemy. I do however, firmly believe that in the face of adversity, within the attempt to make peace with ourselves, we will eventually find the will to overcome our pain, and become our own greatest friend.

This will is rooted by courage, stemmed from strength, and empowered by you.

-On a side note, it can also be your own little anecdote to assist others in struggle =]