The relationship between the nature of human beings and the
nature of social order is dynamic and complex. For example, the sex drive is part of human nature,
but social norms dictate which of all of its possible forms of expression are
appropriate and which are not. Thus, the
sociocultural dimension has a profound formative effect on human behavior.
Likewise, the ways in which we conceptualize
human nature also have their impacts on culture. That is why the dynamic interaction between the individual and society
cannot be separated in terms of cause and effect. Rather, each one is found continually influencing and
reinforcing the other.
As we have seen, mental models of human nature produce
outcomes that tend to validate them. They
generate social structures that in turn confirm and reinforce them. If we believe that we are no more than specially
endowed animals, we are likely to follow our instincts, and our culture will
tend to reflect a hedonistic search for pleasure and crude competition. The resultant society, with its emphasis on
entertainment and a competitive spirit, will reinforce the model of man as a
rational animal.
If we follow the fatalistic / deterministic creed that man is
a victim of forces he cannot control, we will see that belief reflected in a
society that prefers not to take responsibility for its actions, but waits
passively for someone else to solve its problems. The notion that some races are inherently superior to
others will result in oppression and exploitation and, to the degree that their
power admits, discriminated groups will foment protests, rebellions or power
struggles.
These complementary
mental models regarding the nature of man and society have been perpetuated in
all echelons of society and extended to every corner of the globe. However,
if we change these mental models for a conceptual framework based on the
potential for human nobility, which recognizes the unique contributions that
each one can make to the wellbeing of all, we will see a holistic relationship
between the person and society, a reciprocal interaction between the welfare of
each individual and his or her impact on the good of the whole.
According to one mental model regarding the nature of social
order, conflict is inevitable in all societies, and is even a cause of
progress. When this idea is
added to the concept of man as inherently violent and greedy, what you have is
a society that is rife with clashes at all levels. In this section we will review some of the elements of
this mental model: the ‘law of the
jungle’, competition, power, identity, and war.
Other traditional
mental models of human society are divisionistic. They are intimately
related to the concept of man as naturally selfish and competitive, as they
view humanity as a collection of different groups, each with its own interests,
in continual struggle amongst them. They include aspects such as
projection, demonization, racism, uniformity versus diversity, and the fear of
losing our individual and/or collective identity. In this section we will see how these mental models were formed and what
effects they have had in shaping the world as we know it.
This section will present a critical analysis of several
elements of these two sets of mental models according to which human society is
necessarily divisive and conflictive, and will conclude that the arguments on
which they are based are unfounded. Saying
this is not to suggest that society is necessarily united and cooperative.
Rather, it means that all communities –large or
small– are capable of deciding what they want for themselves, whether an
existence plagued with competition and violence, or a peaceful, mutualistic
lifestyle.
For further information on this topic by the same author, click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment