Misanthropy as a philosophical position

nyarlothothep

In light of humanity's history and in its continued persistent propensity towards warfare, greed and lack of foresight is misanthropy a justified position?

Joe1919

nyarlothothep wrote: »

...... is misanthropy a justified position?

Yes......and......No

On the one hand...

'The natural condition of mankind - his condition prior to establishment of the state - is one of misery and "War, where every man is Enemy to every man" and life is "solitary, pore, nasty, brutish, and short' (Hobbs)

'People's nature is bad. Their goodness is a matter of deliberate effort... (Xunzi )

On the other hand....

Man in the state of nature "breathes only peace and freedom; he wishes only to live and remain idle". "[H]is heart yearns for nothing; his modest needs are easily within reach" (Rousseau)

'Human nature's being good is like water's tending downward. There is no human who does not tend toward goodness. There is no water that does not tend downward.' ( Mencius )

I think (imo) that its like the old saying 'is the glass half full or is the glass half empty' i.e. The value of human nature for you is the value that 'you' put on human nature.
(Subjective view)

http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~eschwitz/SchwitzPapers/HumanNature060522.htm

Another interesting quote (Sartre)

'Hell is Other People'

http://legacy.lclark.edu/~clayton/commentaries/hell.html

Joycey

nyarlothothep wrote: »

In light of humanity's history and in its continued persistent propensity towards warfare, greed and lack of foresight is misanthropy a justified position?

What about its continued persistent propensity towards mutual co-operation, selfless generosity and intelligent planning ahead? I think you are cherry picking the "bad" parts of humanity TBH.

As far as misanthropy being "justified"... Im not sure who it needs to be justified to. Yourself? If you are a misanthrope then you are a misanthrope. If you get caught breaking a law somewhere in the process of being a misanthrope then you will probably get punished for it. I dont believe in Karma or god or anything so I dont think there'l be any authority that you will be pleading your case to other than those on the planet.

Also, your argument goes something along the lines of: "everyone else is doing it so i'm going to do it too". If you can make that acceptable to yourself then go ahead and be a misanthrope :pac:

nyarlothothep

Joycey wrote: »

What about its continued persistent propensity towards mutual co-operation, selfless generosity and intelligent planning ahead? I think you are cherry picking the "bad" parts of humanity TBH.

As far as misanthropy being "justified"... Im not sure who it needs to be justified to. Yourself? If you are a misanthrope then you are a misanthrope. If you get caught breaking a law somewhere in the process of being a misanthrope then you will probably get punished for it. I dont believe in Karma or god or anything so I dont think there'l be any authority that you will be pleading your case to other than those on the planet.

Also, your argument goes something along the lines of: "everyone else is doing it so i'm going to do it too". If you can make that acceptable to yourself then go ahead and be a misanthrope :pac:

No nothing your supposing is what I meant in my argument. I'm certainly not appealing to a higher authority. What I was saying was that it seems the negative aspects of humanity seem to outweigh its positive attributes if you look at the general patterns of history. The positive elements manifest themselves in future generations, maybe the human race is salvageable but I'm suggesting the opposite to see whether there is a rational basis for suspecting that humans are fundamentally doomed to repeat the same negative actions over and over again throughout history.

Joycey

nyarlothothep wrote: »

What I was saying was that it seems the negative aspects of humanity seem to outweigh its positive attributes if you look at the general patterns of history. The positive elements manifest themselves in future generations, maybe the human race is salvageable but I'm suggesting the opposite to see whether there is a rational basis for suspecting that humans are fundamentally doomed to repeat the same negative actions over and over again throughout history.

But for all the wars, torturing, needless starvation etc in the world today that we hear about through the media, or in times past that we read about in history books, there are countless more acts of thankless compassion, self sacrafice etc that are either not deemed profitable enough to report in the mass media or not judged to be historically significant enough to warrant being published in a history book. That doesnt mean that they dont occur.

If its the case that the argument you are making is something along the lines of: everybody else is bad so I am justified in acting badly, then I would say not only is it a poor argument (jumping off cliffs and so on), but that you would be incorrect to say that everybody else is bad (or at least all, or mostly bad) in the first place.

nyarlothothep

Joycey wrote: »

But for all the wars, torturing, needless starvation etc in the world today that we hear about through the media, or in times past that we read about in history books, there are countless more acts of thankless compassion, self sacrafice etc that are either not deemed profitable enough to report in the mass media or not judged to be historically significant enough to warrant being published in a history book. That doesnt mean that they dont occur.

If its the case that the argument you are making is something along the lines of: everybody else is bad so I am justified in acting badly, then I would say not only is it a poor argument (jumping off cliffs and so on), but that you would be incorrect to say that everybody else is bad (or at least all, or mostly bad) in the first place.

I've already stated this is not what I meant. What I mean is that one can dislike the vast majority of people and avoid contact or involvement with the general thrust of society without acting badly.

Joycey

nyarlothothep wrote: »

I've already stated this is not what I meant. What I mean is that one can dislike the vast majority of people and avoid contact or involvement with the general thrust of society without acting badly.

Ah OK, sorry. Much of this stems from me not understanding the word misanthrope then. Sorry

From Wikipedia: "Misanthropy is a general dislike, distrust, disgust, contempt, or hatred of the human species. A misanthrope is someone who harbors those views and feelings."

In which case you are left to decide whether or not an affect (a way of being towards something) is something that can or needs to be justified. Heidegger, for instance, would say that it can not and need not because an emotion (hatred, dislike, contempt etc) is a way in which the world is disclosed to us. It is only by means of affect/emotion (he calls it mood) that things appear to us in the first place. If human beings arise originally in consciousness as something mistrusted or contemptuous, then I dont think you can really be held responsible for that fact.

Levinas would take a slightly different position but again would say that an emotion, or way of being towards something, is not something you can be held responsible for. In fact, he takes an extreme view of emotion (which I couldnt disagree more with), where he says that emotion (and not nothingness, as it is in Heidegger) is the antithesis of the subjectivisation of the subject. And in fact that the subject is destroyed in affect. He says "All emotion is fundamentally vertigo." That we are overwhelmed by emotion and that the subject loses its power to "gather itself together" or to react for itself to things in the world.

Im writing an essay at the moment on basically just this, and ive just started reading a Sartre book called "Sketch for a Theory of the Emotions" which id highly recommend. I think his argument is going to be something like, you are not responsible for the way in which things appear to you (by means of disgust, contempt etc), but rather that any action you take or dont take after the initial period of the world being disclosed to you, you are responsible for and hence must justify.

So in summary, Im not sure whether misanthropy is justified/justifiable, depends on your point of view