mmcd
07-16-2005, 08:50 AM
I remember back in English class in high school when we were reading Lord of the Flies, the teacher posed the question: Is man basically good and society corrupts him, or is he basically evil and society civilizes him? At the time, I was staunchly in the camp of man being basically evil with society acting to constrain him. My conclusion was based mainly on my idea of what would happen if all government/society were to suddenly dissolve. I knew my action would be to arm myself and start acquiring and consolidating as much wealth and power as possible. I figured even those who tried to be “good” would eventually be overcome by harsh reality, and either change their ways, die, or submit to the authority of others. I realized that this situation would eventually result in new societies and governments being formed with those who managed to acquire the most wealth and power being in charge. It’s almost as if the formation of government/society is an inevitable event among groups of people.
This situation is exactly what Hobbes envisioned in Leviathan. Man, living in a state of nature, would endure a life that is “nasty, brutish, and short” as a result of his insatiable (perhaps instinctual?) desire for wealth and power. In order to escape this horrid existence, men cooperated, governments were formed, and political authority in the form of the Divine Right of Kings came into existence. Hobbes believed that the ruler must be obeyed no matter what, otherwise there was the risk of government/society dissolving and man being thrust back into the state of nature.
As to the question of whether man is basically good and is corrupted by society, or is basically evil and is civilized by it, the answer is that he’s neither, it’s a bullshit question. Are wolves good or evil? Are fish good or evil? Are crocodiles good or evil? Inquiring about the moral nature of man before the advent of society is equally ridiculous. Eat, drink, sleep, [censored], piss, and [censored]. That’s it, there’s really not much more to man’s life the state of nature. Good and evil only come into the picture after societies are formed. These terms are nothing more than social constructs, and the behaviors which these terms encompass are byproducts of man living in civilized society.
Society and government didn’t spring out of man’s need to escape an ultra-violent state of nature. They came into existence because man was intelligent enough to realize that life would be easier for everybody if people worked together. In order to function, however, groups of people needed leaders, and out of this arose man’s will to power. After all, it is better to be in charge than to be forced to take orders. This will to power is what made me believe man was basically evil, and it is also what made life in Hobbes’ state of nature nasty, brutish, and short. In order to reap the benefits of an easier life through cooperation, man had to bear the burden of his own ruthless will to power.
If individuals’ will to power grew too strong, any benefit of cooperation would be lost in constant violence and turmoil. In order for human society to avoid constant dissolutions into a Hobbesian state of nature, it was necessary to create something that would curb individuals’ will to power: Religion. It is far easier to curb the individual ambitions of the masses by telling them they’ll burn in hell for eternity if they don’t behave themselves, than it is to do so by explaining to them that all of the benefits of society will be lost if they don’t accept their place in the pecking order. Religion is nothing more than a mechanism through which man’s will to power is curbed and society is allowed to progress.
This situation is exactly what Hobbes envisioned in Leviathan. Man, living in a state of nature, would endure a life that is “nasty, brutish, and short” as a result of his insatiable (perhaps instinctual?) desire for wealth and power. In order to escape this horrid existence, men cooperated, governments were formed, and political authority in the form of the Divine Right of Kings came into existence. Hobbes believed that the ruler must be obeyed no matter what, otherwise there was the risk of government/society dissolving and man being thrust back into the state of nature.
As to the question of whether man is basically good and is corrupted by society, or is basically evil and is civilized by it, the answer is that he’s neither, it’s a bullshit question. Are wolves good or evil? Are fish good or evil? Are crocodiles good or evil? Inquiring about the moral nature of man before the advent of society is equally ridiculous. Eat, drink, sleep, [censored], piss, and [censored]. That’s it, there’s really not much more to man’s life the state of nature. Good and evil only come into the picture after societies are formed. These terms are nothing more than social constructs, and the behaviors which these terms encompass are byproducts of man living in civilized society.
Society and government didn’t spring out of man’s need to escape an ultra-violent state of nature. They came into existence because man was intelligent enough to realize that life would be easier for everybody if people worked together. In order to function, however, groups of people needed leaders, and out of this arose man’s will to power. After all, it is better to be in charge than to be forced to take orders. This will to power is what made me believe man was basically evil, and it is also what made life in Hobbes’ state of nature nasty, brutish, and short. In order to reap the benefits of an easier life through cooperation, man had to bear the burden of his own ruthless will to power.
If individuals’ will to power grew too strong, any benefit of cooperation would be lost in constant violence and turmoil. In order for human society to avoid constant dissolutions into a Hobbesian state of nature, it was necessary to create something that would curb individuals’ will to power: Religion. It is far easier to curb the individual ambitions of the masses by telling them they’ll burn in hell for eternity if they don’t behave themselves, than it is to do so by explaining to them that all of the benefits of society will be lost if they don’t accept their place in the pecking order. Religion is nothing more than a mechanism through which man’s will to power is curbed and society is allowed to progress.