| | Al Rodbell said:
Focus on the individual distorts the nature of humans, as a species. We are a social animal, and interaction, companionship, sexual satisfaction, all is part of this picture. Calling a human being a "social animal" is a distortion of the nature of the species. There is a third alternative to the classic "individual vs. social" dichotomy that you are stuck on. Here is a short excerpt from Ayn Rand's book, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal which may help illuminate it for you:
Man gains enormous values from dealing with other men; living in a human society is his proper way of life—but only on certain conditions. Man is not a lone wolf and he is not a social animal. He is a contractual animal. He has to plan his life long-range, make his own choices, and deal with other men by voluntary agreement (and he has to be able to rely on their observance of the agreements they entered). Collectivists who aspire to help mankind achieve the status of "social animal" must have an exceedingly poor understanding of what a social animal actually is. Social animals instinctively sacrifice themselves for the good of the dominant members of their group. Within the framework of any "progressive" collectivist system, it is assumed that all people will be treated equally, with those most able providing for those who are most needy. Social animals don't practice any such form of egalitarianism. Social pack animals, such as wolves, dogs, and even meercats, all conform to a social structure where the lower strata of "society" are not allowed to perform any basic functions such as eating or breeding without the "permission" of the society's strongest members. An alpha dog or wolf will even determine whether a subordinate must remain standing or is allowed to lie down. Social animals that tend toward herd behavior survive predation by pushing their weakest adult members to the edge of the herd as a sacrifice to protect the strongest members. While humans have occasionally been known to behave in similar fashion to a pack of wolves or a flock of sheep, such is not our ideal condition. We are not social animals.
Our intelligence and capacity to use reason puts us in a unique category among all known existing life forms. We benefit greatly from participation in society, but only when that society is one that doesn't seek to limit the potential of any individual member and only when no individual member attempts to impose his will on any other individual. That is the essence of a human's "social responsibility" - to abstain from enslaving other humans. A dog doesn't mind letting a stronger pack member tell it when its allowed to eat, breed, or rest. It's instincts might prompt it to fight to gain dominance, but once it fails it will be quite content in its submissive role. It's instincts cause it to behave that way, and it can't form an objection because it can't even think! When humans give up their unique ability to think - when they allow another person to do the thinking and impose his will upon them, they do not achieve an enlightened state of "social animal" bliss. Rather, they lower themselves to the level of a true social animal. The same can be said for the "great leader" who attempts to impose his own will on other people. He too is giving up the benefits of a true human society and lowering himself to the level of an alpha dog.
The nature of humans is such that we are designed to survive by thinking and deciding. A society can't think; only an individual can do that. Still, humans gain much from trading with other humans and from the protection that a group of humans can provide when some common criminal or some "great leader" attempts to impose his own will by force (force, theft and fraud being the only ways possible to impose your will on another human being). This leads us to a condition where, just as Ayn Rand points out, it is incumbent on man to form and participate in a society if he wants to succeed, but only to the extent that the society doesn't cause exactly the harm that it is supposed to prevent. Participation in the society must be voluntary, not coercive. Relationships between men must be consensual, which could also be phrased "contractual."
|
|
