Human Nature

Question 1

Essay Structure

Answer 1

Philosophical Issue, Implications, Thesis statement.
Position 1: Psychological egoism, Existential Implications, Ethical implications, Hobbes, Adam Smith, Limitations (evolutionary biology, psychological benefits, toddlers), different interpretation of Adam Smith, counter argument to this interpretation.
Position 2: Corrupted by society, Existential implications, Rousseau, limitations, Noah Harari (homo sapiens), different interpretation, dismissal of different interpretation.
Position 3: Driven by a mixture of reason and impulse, Phaedrus, chariot, Milgram experiment, prisoner’s dilemma.
Conclusion, why is Plato’s position more plausible.

Question 2

Philosophical issue

Answer 2

Are we inherently selfish?

Question 3

Implications

Answer 3

Existential, Hobbes: If everyone is driven to pursue our individual ends, then there wouldn’t be much ground for meaningful connection; since we only care about ourselves, as a consequence of this, we would feel a lack of connection and loneliness. It also impacts how we rule our society — the Sovereign.
Existential, Rousseau: Meaningful connections between humans are possible, because we are inherently compassionate. It also impacts how we rule our society — back to nature.
Ethical, Plato: He implies that humans have both the capacity to do good and bad, therefore we are responsible for our own actions. It also impacts how we rule our society — Philosophers.

Question 4

Psychological Egoism

Answer 4

We are driven to pursue our individual ends and will therefore seek advantage over others any change we get.

Question 5

Hobbes

Answer 5

He believed that the ability of others to cause us harm provokes insecurity, or “diffidence” in us and thus we pursue power and glory to make us more secure.
“A time of war, where every man is enemy to every man”.

Question 6

Adam Smith

Answer 6

“it is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard of their own self-interest”

Question 7

Different interpretation to Adam smith and counter argument.

Answer 7

The butcher, the brewer and the baker are not working due to their own self interest, but because they collaborate in order to achieve a common goal. It can be said that they are collaborating out of their own self-interest.

Question 8

Rousseau

Answer 8

He believes that humans are corrupted by society, he believes that we are innately compassionate and practice more “amour de soi” (love of self) than “amour de propre” (love for status and power).

Question 9

Limitations to Rousseau

Answer 9

There’s little empirical evidence that humans in their natural state are peaceful.

Question 10

Noah Harari

Answer 10

In the book “a brief history of human kind”, it is suggested that long before the Industrial Revolution, Homo sapiens held the record among all organisms for driving most plant and animal species to their extinction.

Question 11

Position 3

Answer 11

The self is not selfish, but rather driven by a mixture of reason and impulse

Question 12

Phaedrus

Answer 12

In the book Phaedrus, Plato compares the soul to a chariot pulled by a white horse (spirit), dark horse (appetite) and driven by a charioteer (reason). All these 3 need to work in conjunction, otherwise the chariot won’t move; harmony between the three is maintained by the pursuit of reason.

Question 13

Milgram experiment

Answer 13

65% of the people followed authority blindly and committed atrocities, while 35% of the people abstained.

Question 14

Prisoner’s dilemma

Answer 14

Through reason, individuals can understand that if they pursue their own self interest, the outcome is worse than if they had both collaborated

Question 15

Why is Plato’s position more plausible?

Answer 15

It acts as the common ground, with this position we can explain “anomalies” which challenges the premise of Hobbes’ and Roussau’s position.
Hobbes — acts of sacrifices.
Rousseau — acts of violence between humans in tribal life.