Robert Hanna on our Sociable Sociality
= Article. Robert Hanna.
URL =
Contextual Quote
"Now helping myself to the empirical and conceptual results of a recent historico-philosophical anti-Hobbesian trilogy—by Rutger Bregman, Larissa MacFarquhar, and Rebecca Solnit3—then I can clearly and distinctly demonstrate that Hobbesians neo-Hobbesians, and also Rousseau-ians are not merely mistaken, but actually dangerously and spectacularly mistaken, not only
- (i) that all human beings are inherently egoistic and mutually antagonistic by nature or neurobiology (Hobbesians or neo-Hobbesians), but also
- (ii) that even if they are not so by nature, then all human beings are still inevitably egoistic and mutually antagonistic by virtue of culture, civilization, and society (Rousseau-ians).
These claims are simply false, given the actual empirical facts on the ground, not only the everyday facts about people’s vividly manifest true human need for sociability."
= Robert Hanna [1]
Discussion
Robert Hanna:
"Granting that, and now helping myself to the empirical and conceptual results of a recent historico-philosophical anti-Hobbesian trilogy—by Rutger Bregman, Larissa MacFarquhar, and Rebecca Solnit3—then I can clearly and distinctly demonstrate that Hobbesians neo-Hobbesians, and also Rousseau-ians are not merely mistaken, but actually dangerously and spectacularly mistaken, not only
(i) that all human beings are inherently egoistic and mutually antagonistic by nature or neurobiology (Hobbesians or neo-Hobbesians), but also
(ii) that even if they are not so by nature, then all human beings are still inevitably egoistic and mutually antagonistic by virtue of culture, civilization, and society (Rousseau-ians).
These claims are simply false, given the actual empirical facts on the ground, not
only the everyday facts about people’s vividly manifest true human need for sociability
during the 2020-2021 pandemic, but also as displayed and documented by the historicophilosophers of The Anti-Hobbesian Trilogy. As a matter of actual fact, many people not only have in the past but also nowadays really do feel, choose, and act altruistically, some
of them characteristically, and some of them under specific ranges of contextual
conditions, such as disasters, neo-utopian social experiments, progressive political
movements, religions or spirituality, and so-on. Therefore, it cannot possibly be true that
all human beings are either inherently (by nature) or inevitably (by culture) egoistic and
mutually antagonistic. At most, what could be true is that at any time, whether in the past
or currently, many people often feel, choose, and act in egoistic and mutually antagonistic
ways, and also that some people characteristically feel, choose, and act in egoistic and
mutually antagonistic ways. But those are perfectly consistent with the anti-Hobbesian
and anti-Rousseau-ian truth about rational human altruism. So even despite their
widespread currency, the Hobbesian, neo-Hobbesian, and Rousseau-ian theses alike—
not to mention popular cynicism about human nature—are simply scientific and
philosophical dead letters.
On the contrary, given the actual empirical evidence—and this will undoubtedly seem, to many, to be two claims that are either deeply “shocking” or ludicrously “utopian” in the classical millenarian, pejorative sense — not only
(i) are all human persons innately capable of altruism, but also
(ii) the capacity for altruism can be regularly activated and cultivated under specific ranges of contextual conditions.
More information
The Anti-Hobbesian Trilogy
a recent historico-philosophical anti-Hobbesian trilogy—by Rutger Bregman, Larissa MacFarquhar, and Rebecca Solnit
- Bregman, Humankind: A Hopeful History;
- MacFarquhar, Strangers Drowning: Impossible Idealism, Drastic Choices, and the Urge to Help; and
- R. Solnit, A Paradise Built in Hell: The Extraordinary Communities That Arise in Disaster