Theories that Support Adversarialism
1 like1,022 views
We would be hard put to find anyone who thought that this world is so perfect that it cannot improve. Most people would like a better world, a society of justice, unity and peace. However, when any proposal for the construction of such a society is posed, many people counter that it is impossible. When asked why, the most common arguments put forth have to do with the nature of man and society. The purpose for this presentation is to refute popular beliefs by which selfishness, greed, conflict, aggression, and violence define human nature, and to show that they are no more than options that have become predominant in certain cultures, especially in the Western world that has imposed itself on todays world. It proposes that the roots of this cultural stock are to be found in medieval Europe, which has gained control of a large part of the world through conquest, colonization and cultural hegemony throughout the past five centuries. We will see how the arguments that justify and legitimize this culture have been built through science, philosophy, religion, and the arts a full-blown myth and belief system regarding the naturalness and inevitability of contest, struggle and hostility among humans, and how this myth has been institutionalized to form our modern social structures.
Theories that Support Adversarialism
- 1. Science versus Peace? Deconstructing Adversarial Theory
- 2. Objectives: Performance Objective: By the end of this session, the participants will be able to discuss the weaknesses of various theories that support the adversarial culture. Learning Objs: During this session, participants will: 1. Discuss the results of a survey on what people think about human nature. 2. Make a list of why many believe that world justice, unity and peace are impossible. 3. Develop responses to some of the reasons identified. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 3. Culture of Adversarialism Characterized by divisionism, conflict, competition, struggle, strife, aggression, violence, and wars. Socio-structural aspects consisting of win- lose relationships. Psycho-structural aspects based on belief that win-lose relationships are inevitable and/or beneficial. Current globalized Western culture is a culture of adversarialism. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 4. Culture of Peace The opposite of adversarialism: a society of mutualism, cooperation and mutual aid. A complex concept that continues to evolve and develop as the outcome of practice. A growing body of shared values, attitudes, behaviors, and lifestyles based on: Non-violence, Respect for fundamental rights and freedoms, Understanding, tolerance and solidarity, Co-participation, Free circulation of information, Full involvement and strengthening of women. A vast project of multidimensional, world-wide scope. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 5. Basic Theses: Human nature makes us just as capable of cooperation as competition, of aggression as tenderness, of greed as generosity. Which we express is influenced but not determined by our culture; and can be changed. The world status is a fruit of collective, historical choices, greatly influenced by 500 years of Western cultural hegemony. Human nature poses no obstacle to exchanging the current culture of violence for a culture of peace, and to building a world of justice, unity and peace. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 6. Group Discussion Social dilemmas (win-lose) are destroy- ing our society. The solution is to reboot all institutions (as win-win relations). Many people think this is impossible. Question: What arguments do they use? (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 7. Epistemological Borrowing What is epistemological borrowing? From physics From evolution From ethology From psychology From theology Reductionism: what is wrong with it? What happens when the theory changes? (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 8. Study Questions: Physics How did classical physics further the develop- ment of the human and social sciences? How did it lead to the worldview for the culture of adversarialism? How have the new physics opened the door to a new worldview? What is the matter with Social Entropy? (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 9. The Legacy of Physics Many current sciences were then branches of philosophy. Newtonian physics gave them: A model of scientific study A coherent epistemology A ready-made meta-paradigm It also gave them theories from which to borrow. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 10. Social Physics Physics Society Atoms Individuals Collisions Conflicts Momentum Motivation Direction Interests Mass Power (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 11. Philosophical Implications Classical Physics New Physics Atomistic Systemic Reductionist Non-reductionist Mechanicism Organicism Deterministic Self-determination Materialistic Integrality (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 12. Social Entropy Entropy: Disorder in a system grows or remains stable. Social entropy: Society will disintegrate and finally collapse. Reason: More individuals, drivers and interests multiply complexity of society to unsustainable point and collapse. Collapse: Spend more energy maintaining social structures than providing benefits, leads to social disorder. Chardin: Expansion > complexification > interiorization Systems: Not adapting to change > tension > turning point > collapse of old system > rise of new system. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 13. Study Questions: Evolution How did the concept of survival of the fittest come about, and what are its adversarial implications? How can survival of the fittest be interpreted to support non-adversarial conclusions? Which applies best to human society: natural or artificial selection? Why? (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 14. Survival of the Fittest Darwin: From artificial to natural selection Spencer: Best fit in the struggle for life Survival of strongest vs. most adaptable Merged under name of Darwinism (over Darwins dead body) It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the most responsive to change. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 15. Social Darwinism
- 17. Non-Adversarial Survival Humans: not adaptive physiology but behavior. Individual survival requires community survival. Community survival requires mutualism. Adversarialism is just maladaptive! Violent, conflictive members punished. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 18. Artificial Selection Plant wild species > reproduce the best. Institutions: no randomly mutating genes. Society building is conscious, deliberate. Adapting structures to change is, too. Natural selection is excuse for injustice. Each failed attempt is costly for society. Learn from experience and grow together. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 19. Study Questions: Genetics How did genetics support adversarial findings of evolutionary theory? On what assumptions does socio- biology base its conclusions? What is the problem with genetic determinism? How does the New Biology answer these ideas? (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 20. Genetics and adversarial evolution It provided the mechanism by which characteristics are passed from one generation to the next. Genes were attributed adversarial intentionality Richard Dawkins: The Selfish Gene (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 21. Problems with genetic determinism Double reductionism: genemansociety (no proof of behavior or social dynamics) Universality of feature proves genetic origin (from gender relations to religious creed) Genetic continuity: from animals to humans (mere analogies; evolutionary distance) Inherited personality: chip of the old block (no sure evidence; circular arguments) Genetic capacity: not enough DNA (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 22. Problems with Sociobiology Edward O.Wilson, SociobiologyThe New Synthesis: Describes human nature by observing society Assumes widespread = genetically determined This nature coded in us through social Darwinism Errors: reductionist, biased, ideological, essentialist Lewontin: An attempt to convince people that life is what it has to be and perhaps even ought to be. Karlberg: A justification of injustices and inequities. Name replaced by Evolutionary Psychology. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 23. New Biologys Answers DNA is a self-organizing force, not blindly led by natural selection. Organisms experience and respond to their environment, but also create it. Symbiogenesis: organisms were formed by symbiotic relations turned permanent. Natural selection adjusts population levels, but usually does not destroy gene base. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 24. Seville Statement on Violence It is scientifically incorrect to say that in the course of human evolution there has been a selection for aggressive behavior Violence is neither in our evolutionary legacy nor in our genes. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 25. Study Questions: Ethology Is there a killer instinct in human beings? Do humans beings have any instincts? Do humans have a violent brain? (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 26. Do we have a killer instinct? Evolutionary distance from animals too great Hunting is not murder War is unique to humans Most youth are peaceful Training changes this Nation-states impose war Even this is relatively new in human history (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 27. Are there any human instincts? Depends on common or scientific definition: A repetitive pattern of specific and often complex behaviors, common to entire species, automatic, irresistible, unalterable, not due to learning Man has no behaviors that meet this definition! Reflex: simple, automatic reaction from spinal cord or local nerves Biological predisposition: innate, more complex behavior that requires learning to express itself Drive: biological need that grows until satisfied (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 28. The Violent Brain Limbic center lets us feel fear and anger A normal person has full control over it Surrounded by many control functions Pathologies heighten feeling; lose control Not define human nature by pathology Most brain centers for peaceful activities It is scientifically incorrect to say that we have a violent brain There is nothing in our neuro- physiology that compels us to react violently. (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 29. Behavior and Fitness Effect on Effect on Effect on Behavior actor receiver Society Selfishness More fitness Less fitness 0 sum Cooperation More fitness More fitness + sum Little less Much more Altruism + sum fitness fitness Vengeance Less fitness Less fitness sum (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 30. Study Question: Good/Evil What are possible consequences (positive or negative) of the beliefs: that human beings are evil or sinners by nature? that we are inherently good? Is there an alternative approach? What might be some of its potential consequences? (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 31. Borrowing from Theology From fatalism to determinism From original sin to genetics The problem with innate goodness The alternative of a double human nature (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 32. Generosity Cooperation Solidarity Double Human Compassion Higher Tolerancia Nature Truth Love Nature Mind Hatred Lies Greed Violence Lower Aggressive Nature Competition Selfishness
- 33. Myths of Origin Say where we came from and how Timeless: cover past, present, future Give us an identity: good or bad Define prospects: empower or limit us Some contemporary examples: Creation myth in Book of Genesis Evolution myth in (Neo-)Darwinism We need an empowering myth of origin (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 34. The Proof by Assertion Fallacy A lie told often enough becomes the truth." (Joseph Goebbles, Nazi Minister of Propaganda)
- 35. Science & Socio-cultural Reality Science justifies historical events Science legitimizes the status quo Science reinforces social attitudes Science can be a source of socio-cultural change Its up to us (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-
- 36. THE END Or just the beginning? (c) 2012 - Peter C. Newton-Evans Newton-