Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sushan]

This topic is about the March 2023 Philosophy Book of the Month, Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness by Chet Shupe

Thoreau once said, “The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation.” That quote is famous, because it rings so true. Wild animals, once captured, are never the same, again. Animals born in cages are more like humans—often bored, anxious, or depressed. I think we need to give more thought to what it was like to be human, before civilization caged us.

—Chet Shupe


Thoreau's statement suggests that the constraints of modern society may be at odds with our innate desire for freedom and autonomy. As humans, we may be affected similarly to captive animals, exhibiting signs of anxiety and depression. This raises important questions about the impact of civilization on our well-being and how we can strike a balance between the benefits of modern life and the need for human autonomy. How can we cultivate a sense of meaning and purpose in our lives while living in a society that may restrict us?

[Stoppelmann]

Thoreau once said, “The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation.” That quote is famous, because it rings so true. Wild animals, once captured, are never the same, again. Animals born in cages are more like humans—often bored, anxious, or depressed. I think we need to give more thought to what it was like to be human, before civilization caged us.—Chet Shupe

Thoreau's statement suggests that the constraints of modern society may be at odds with our innate desire for freedom and autonomy. As humans, we may be affected similarly to captive animals, exhibiting signs of anxiety and depression. This raises important questions about the impact of civilization on our well-being and how we can strike a balance between the benefits of modern life and the need for human autonomy. How can we cultivate a sense of meaning and purpose in our lives while living in a society that may restrict us?

It is an idealistic perspective to assume that the original participation with nature was in particular about freedom and autonomy, and not about a struggle to survive, pitted against wild animals, against the environment that human beings had yet to understand and enhance with their understanding, so that it gave a yield from which they could live. Shupe says, “homo sapiens appeared, took hold, then flourished—at-one with Nature” but that was a long process. They were nomads; therefore, their comforts were minimal, but more importantly, they were exposed and vulnerable. An advantage would have been not to be cognitively impressionable, but we cannot be sure about that.

Shupe then says, “One of the more potent of evolution’s special gifts to humanity—our gift of language—made possible the second chapter in the life of our species.”
The emergence of language was indeed the beginning of an expanded cooperation, and the presence of mythologies suggest that they were trying to understand the situation into which they were born. Being naturally curious and expressive, the progress of intellectual, cultural, and material development, leading to the arts and eventually the sciences, began, it seems, with the extensive use of record-keeping, which led to writing, and later the development of complex political and social institutions. The more cooperation, the more learning spread out.

At what stage did the “quiet desperation” begin? When did human beings begin being “bored, anxious, or depressed”? Which “constraints of modern society” became so oppressive that we would yearn for return to the “wild” life portrayed very briefly above?

I would argue that humanity has been struggling from the beginning of time, and that the conformity to roles required by the tribe for survival was just as problematic (and non-conformity deadly) as anything a modern person experiences today. However, the massive increase in such problems will have occurred when the industrial revolution treated human beings as machines, or cogs in a machine, and took them away from their natural environment – as harsh as it still was, otherwise there would have been no incentive – and promised them an existence. Of course, along the way, there were a multitude of changes that each caused problems, but these were not as impactful as the migration into cities.

Shupe seems to think that “Just by doing what they feel like doing,” humans, like other animals, “unknowingly serve and perpetuate the life of their species.” Animals follow instincts blindly, for good or for worse, and yes, procreation does perpetuate the life of the species, but I wouldn’t say that we humans are underpopulated. Doing what you feel like sounds a lot like procrastination, which is well known for hindering getting the job done.

His ”Law of Life”: “To serve life, do things that feel good, and avoid doing things that result in emotional pain,” sounds straightforward enough, except when everybody is focused on their own well-being. The way to promote the best well-being has been proven to cooperate. In fact, probably the most gigantic jump that humanity made was when we started trading, and expanding that trading further afield and diversifying the goods on offer. But that entailed thinking about our trading partners, what they wanted, rather than building an army and just taking it from them. Pillaging secured one yield, whereas trade made it sustainable, and occupied people at the same time.

He says, “You can take human beings out of Nature, but you can’t take Nature out of human beings” but thinks he can do without rules of behaviour. There are always rules that grow out of experience. Intuition follows unwritten rules, which are based on a set of guidelines which have been established from experience. When older people laugh at a younger person who make mistakes, they are ridiculing the fact that that person doesn’t know the rules. There are rules to be followed if you want to survive in nature.

He says, “If we men don’t have something in our lives that’s worth dying for, then we have nothing to live for. It’s as simple as that.” I agree that we need a sense for what is sacred, even if we don’t use that word much anymore, but the language “worth dying for” suggests pre-civilisation, or times of war between tribes or nations. It would appear that Shupe thinks that people at war are living an ideal life – I would disagree, and probably most other people too.

I think that Shupe means well, but his language and ideas are incendiary and ideologically driven. I see nothing in his book to help people, other than to promote a roughneck society, in which there may be less depression, but more brutality and competition.

[Sushan]

Thoreau once said, “The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation.” That quote is famous, because it rings so true. Wild animals, once captured, are never the same, again. Animals born in cages are more like humans—often bored, anxious, or depressed. I think we need to give more thought to what it was like to be human, before civilization caged us.—Chet Shupe

Thoreau's statement suggests that the constraints of modern society may be at odds with our innate desire for freedom and autonomy. As humans, we may be affected similarly to captive animals, exhibiting signs of anxiety and depression. This raises important questions about the impact of civilization on our well-being and how we can strike a balance between the benefits of modern life and the need for human autonomy. How can we cultivate a sense of meaning and purpose in our lives while living in a society that may restrict us?

It is an idealistic perspective to assume that the original participation with nature was in particular about freedom and autonomy, and not about a struggle to survive, pitted against wild animals, against the environment that human beings had yet to understand and enhance with their understanding, so that it gave a yield from which they could live. Shupe says, “homo sapiens appeared, took hold, then flourished—at-one with Nature” but that was a long process. They were nomads; therefore, their comforts were minimal, but more importantly, they were exposed and vulnerable. An advantage would have been not to be cognitively impressionable, but we cannot be sure about that.

Shupe then says, “One of the more potent of evolution’s special gifts to humanity—our gift of language—made possible the second chapter in the life of our species.”
The emergence of language was indeed the beginning of an expanded cooperation, and the presence of mythologies suggest that they were trying to understand the situation into which they were born. Being naturally curious and expressive, the progress of intellectual, cultural, and material development, leading to the arts and eventually the sciences, began, it seems, with the extensive use of record-keeping, which led to writing, and later the development of complex political and social institutions. The more cooperation, the more learning spread out.

At what stage did the “quiet desperation” begin? When did human beings begin being “bored, anxious, or depressed”? Which “constraints of modern society” became so oppressive that we would yearn for return to the “wild” life portrayed very briefly above?

I would argue that humanity has been struggling from the beginning of time, and that the conformity to roles required by the tribe for survival was just as problematic (and non-conformity deadly) as anything a modern person experiences today. However, the massive increase in such problems will have occurred when the industrial revolution treated human beings as machines, or cogs in a machine, and took them away from their natural environment – as harsh as it still was, otherwise there would have been no incentive – and promised them an existence. Of course, along the way, there were a multitude of changes that each caused problems, but these were not as impactful as the migration into cities.

Shupe seems to think that “Just by doing what they feel like doing,” humans, like other animals, “unknowingly serve and perpetuate the life of their species.” Animals follow instincts blindly, for good or for worse, and yes, procreation does perpetuate the life of the species, but I wouldn’t say that we humans are underpopulated. Doing what you feel like sounds a lot like procrastination, which is well known for hindering getting the job done.

His ”Law of Life”: “To serve life, do things that feel good, and avoid doing things that result in emotional pain,” sounds straightforward enough, except when everybody is focused on their own well-being. The way to promote the best well-being has been proven to cooperate. In fact, probably the most gigantic jump that humanity made was when we started trading, and expanding that trading further afield and diversifying the goods on offer. But that entailed thinking about our trading partners, what they wanted, rather than building an army and just taking it from them. Pillaging secured one yield, whereas trade made it sustainable, and occupied people at the same time.

He says, “You can take human beings out of Nature, but you can’t take Nature out of human beings” but thinks he can do without rules of behaviour. There are always rules that grow out of experience. Intuition follows unwritten rules, which are based on a set of guidelines which have been established from experience. When older people laugh at a younger person who make mistakes, they are ridiculing the fact that that person doesn’t know the rules. There are rules to be followed if you want to survive in nature.

He says, “If we men don’t have something in our lives that’s worth dying for, then we have nothing to live for. It’s as simple as that.” I agree that we need a sense for what is sacred, even if we don’t use that word much anymore, but the language “worth dying for” suggests pre-civilisation, or times of war between tribes or nations. It would appear that Shupe thinks that people at war are living an ideal life – I would disagree, and probably most other people too.

I think that Shupe means well, but his language and ideas are incendiary and ideologically driven. I see nothing in his book to help people, other than to promote a roughneck society, in which there may be less depression, but more brutality and competition.

While I understand your concerns about Chet Shupe's ideas, I believe there is value in exploring the concept of human autonomy and the impact of civilization on our well-being. It is true that we need rules to survive in nature, but as civilization has evolved, those rules have become more complex and often restrict our individual freedom.

Shupe's suggestion that we need something in our lives that is worth dying for may seem extreme, but it speaks to the importance of having a sense of purpose and meaning beyond just survival. This is especially relevant in modern society, where many people struggle with feelings of emptiness and lack of direction.

However, I agree that promoting a roughneck society with more brutality and competition is not the answer. Instead, we need to find ways to cultivate a sense of purpose and meaning that is inclusive and promotes empathy and cooperation. This may involve re-evaluating our societal values and priorities, and finding ways to prioritize human autonomy and well-being within the framework of civilization

[Stoppelmann]

While I understand your concerns about Chet Shupe's ideas, I believe there is value in exploring the concept of human autonomy and the impact of civilization on our well-being. It is true that we need rules to survive in nature, but as civilization has evolved, those rules have become more complex and often restrict our individual freedom.

Do you know the song Desperado by the Eagles?

Freedom, oh freedom
Well, that's just some people talkin'
Your prison is walkin' through this world all alone

This is essentially the problem, that our prison is often loneliness, just as they sing:

Why don't you come to your senses?
Come down from your fences
Open the gate
It may be rainin'
But there's a rainbow above you
You better let somebody love you
Before it's too late

There is more philosophy in that than in Shute’s book, which will have taken a long time to write, but will have been as much therapy for him as anything else.

We are experiencing the consequences of individualism today, its extravagances, its eccentricities, but they all take away from the fact that we are social animals, and we have to find a way to accommodate our individual wishes and whims with those of other people, especially with our partners. If we could do that, we might experience well-being.

Shupe's suggestion that we need something in our lives that is worth dying for may seem extreme, but it speaks to the importance of having a sense of purpose and meaning beyond just survival. This is especially relevant in modern society, where many people struggle with feelings of emptiness and lack of direction.

I would rather have something worth living for as a purpose for my life, and as far as I can identify it, it has something to do with a meaningful contribution to society. That can be as simple as wishing people a happy birthday, like a bedridden lady I know, who writes to me every year, despite the fact that we seldom see each other.

However, I agree that promoting a roughneck society with more brutality and competition is not the answer. Instead, we need to find ways to cultivate a sense of purpose and meaning that is inclusive and promotes empathy and cooperation. This may involve re-evaluating our societal values and priorities, and finding ways to prioritize human autonomy and well-being within the framework of civilization.

It may mean re-evaluating for some, but in many cases, it is a case of evaluating to begin with. Too many people just don’t think and expect their whims to be fulfilled at the drop of a hat. Too many people are distracted by trivialities and walk into the wall of reality that they hadn’t noticed. That seems to be a big problem.

[Sushan]

While I understand your concerns about Chet Shupe's ideas, I believe there is value in exploring the concept of human autonomy and the impact of civilization on our well-being. It is true that we need rules to survive in nature, but as civilization has evolved, those rules have become more complex and often restrict our individual freedom.

Do you know the song Desperado by the Eagles?

Freedom, oh freedom
Well, that's just some people talkin'
Your prison is walkin' through this world all alone

This is essentially the problem, that our prison is often loneliness, just as they sing:

Why don't you come to your senses?
Come down from your fences
Open the gate
It may be rainin'
But there's a rainbow above you
You better let somebody love you
Before it's too late

There is more philosophy in that than in Shute’s book, which will have taken a long time to write, but will have been as much therapy for him as anything else.

We are experiencing the consequences of individualism today, its extravagances, its eccentricities, but they all take away from the fact that we are social animals, and we have to find a way to accommodate our individual wishes and whims with those of other people, especially with our partners. If we could do that, we might experience well-being.

Shupe's suggestion that we need something in our lives that is worth dying for may seem extreme, but it speaks to the importance of having a sense of purpose and meaning beyond just survival. This is especially relevant in modern society, where many people struggle with feelings of emptiness and lack of direction.

I would rather have something worth living for as a purpose for my life, and as far as I can identify it, it has something to do with a meaningful contribution to society. That can be as simple as wishing people a happy birthday, like a bedridden lady I know, who writes to me every year, despite the fact that we seldom see each other.

However, I agree that promoting a roughneck society with more brutality and competition is not the answer. Instead, we need to find ways to cultivate a sense of purpose and meaning that is inclusive and promotes empathy and cooperation. This may involve re-evaluating our societal values and priorities, and finding ways to prioritize human autonomy and well-being within the framework of civilization.

It may mean re-evaluating for some, but in many cases, it is a case of evaluating to begin with. Too many people just don’t think and expect their whims to be fulfilled at the drop of a hat. Too many people are distracted by trivialities and walk into the wall of reality that they hadn’t noticed. That seems to be a big problem.

It is true that finding a sense of purpose and meaning beyond survival is important for human well-being. However, the idea that we need something worth dying for should not be taken too literally. Instead, we can focus on cultivating a sense of purpose that is inclusive and promotes empathy and cooperation. This requires evaluating our values and priorities, and finding ways to balance individual autonomy with social responsibility. As social animals, we need to recognize the importance of our connections with others and strive for a society that supports and enhances those connections. Ultimately, it is through meaningful relationships and contributions to our communities that we can find true fulfillment and well-being.

[Stoppelmann]

It is true that finding a sense of purpose and meaning beyond survival is important for human well-being. However, the idea that we need something worth dying for should not be taken too literally. Instead, we can focus on cultivating a sense of purpose that is inclusive and promotes empathy and cooperation. This requires evaluating our values and priorities, and finding ways to balance individual autonomy with social responsibility. As social animals, we need to recognize the importance of our connections with others and strive for a society that supports and enhances those connections. Ultimately, it is through meaningful relationships and contributions to our communities that we can find true fulfillment and well-being.

I am currently reading Mary Harrington, whose views have been criticised in the past as right-wing, but she is a critical spirit that grew up protesting conservative policies, until she suffered the collapse of her ideals, which in part she blamed herself for, but also noted that it was the way that left-wing ideals seemed to always dismantle themselves after a while. In particular, the experience of becoming a mother transformed many of her prejudices, and she gained a new perspective on what was valuable in life.

Her book, Feminism Against Progress, speaks about how modern society has been “whittling-away … every relational understanding of identity,” and effectively pushed against the natural order, suggesting that women are “freed” from an oppressive existence, whereas it was the migration into towns and employment in mills and sweatshops that subjugated women fully, and separated them from their children. It is this artificial environment that has changed society into an economic machine, and anyone who is not contributing to GDP is effectively a worthless appendage.

This is where civilization has had the biggest impact on human nature, in making everybody serve the GDP, making every kind of activity taxable work, and effectively reducing the valuable services of the volunteer function, of cultural expression, and relational endeavour in urban societies. Care of children and the chronically sick became an underpaid and understaffed occupation, the learning curve of children dropped once they reached schooling age, and instead they were taught what they needed for the factory environment.

There is no doubt that history does not portray an idealistic past, but the way the pre-industrial age is often portrayed is prejudiced, and the drudgery of industrial labour is faded out. The modern incorporation of women in taxable labour is idealised, and the struggle of "Team Freedom" as Mary Harrington calls them, is to gain equality of outcome, and “colonise and monetise our every individual longing – even (or perhaps especially) at the expense of interpersonal connection.”

[Sushan]

It is true that finding a sense of purpose and meaning beyond survival is important for human well-being. However, the idea that we need something worth dying for should not be taken too literally. Instead, we can focus on cultivating a sense of purpose that is inclusive and promotes empathy and cooperation. This requires evaluating our values and priorities, and finding ways to balance individual autonomy with social responsibility. As social animals, we need to recognize the importance of our connections with others and strive for a society that supports and enhances those connections. Ultimately, it is through meaningful relationships and contributions to our communities that we can find true fulfillment and well-being.

I am currently reading Mary Harrington, whose views have been criticised in the past as right-wing, but she is a critical spirit that grew up protesting conservative policies, until she suffered the collapse of her ideals, which in part she blamed herself for, but also noted that it was the way that left-wing ideals seemed to always dismantle themselves after a while. In particular, the experience of becoming a mother transformed many of her prejudices, and she gained a new perspective on what was valuable in life.

Her book, Feminism Against Progress, speaks about how modern society has been “whittling-away … every relational understanding of identity,” and effectively pushed against the natural order, suggesting that women are “freed” from an oppressive existence, whereas it was the migration into towns and employment in mills and sweatshops that subjugated women fully, and separated them from their children. It is this artificial environment that has changed society into an economic machine, and anyone who is not contributing to GDP is effectively a worthless appendage.

This is where civilization has had the biggest impact on human nature, in making everybody serve the GDP, making every kind of activity taxable work, and effectively reducing the valuable services of the volunteer function, of cultural expression, and relational endeavour in urban societies. Care of children and the chronically sick became an underpaid and understaffed occupation, the learning curve of children dropped once they reached schooling age, and instead they were taught what they needed for the factory environment.

There is no doubt that history does not portray an idealistic past, but the way the pre-industrial age is often portrayed is prejudiced, and the drudgery of industrial labour is faded out. The modern incorporation of women in taxable labour is idealised, and the struggle of "Team Freedom" as Mary Harrington calls them, is to gain equality of outcome, and “colonise and monetise our every individual longing – even (or perhaps especially) at the expense of interpersonal connection.”

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on Mary Harrington's views and her book "Feminism Against Progress". It is interesting to see how her experiences as a mother have influenced her perspective on what is valuable in life and how modern society has shifted away from relational understandings of identity.

I agree with your point about how civilization has had a significant impact on human nature, with the focus on serving GDP and reducing the value of volunteerism, cultural expression, and relational endeavors. It is important to recognize that not all activities that contribute to well-being and fulfillment can be monetized, and that there are aspects of life beyond economic productivity that are essential for a thriving society.

While being on the middle ground, I can say that the ideas you presented highlight the need for a more holistic approach to human well-being, one that values relationships, empathy, and cooperation alongside individual autonomy and economic productivity. It is a delicate balance that requires ongoing evaluation and reflection, but ultimately, it is through meaningful connections and contributions to our communities that we can find true fulfillment and well-being.