DDR-ARCV / 001Doordoorium

A dispute · spans 3 eras

Nature vs. Society

Are humans naturally good and corrupted by society, or naturally brutal and saved by it?

Hobbes: in the state of nature life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" — society is what makes life bearable. Rousseau: humans in nature are decent and free — society is what corrupts them. The dispute organizes modern political philosophy. Locke takes a middle path; Marx says the question itself is malformed because "human nature" is itself historical; Beauvoir applies the same insight to gender. The deeper question is whether there is any "natural" baseline at all.

◇ ◇ ◇

// The sides

Society redeems

Without society we would tear each other apart.

Society corrupts

Without society we would be free and good.

There is no 'natural'

Human nature is historically and socially produced.