Hi, I am reading The Prince where it explores many aspects of the dark human nature of man. (i.e how they are selfish, working only for self-betterment etc…). I am trying to tie it in with some Renassiance characteristics for a history paper. Humanism seems like a good choice since it explores man’s greatness, potential etc… After a bit of reading, I found that Humanism doesn’t believe men are are good but it doesn’t say much after that. How would I be able to tie this evil nature of men into the humanism aspect or it doesn’t fit at all? Thanks.
It was only after religious metaphors exaggerated and dramatized natural elements in human nature that they became themes. “Humanism” is a little ironic; it is the default discipline but appears negative in the light produced by religious thought, where the invention of “evil” occurs. It is religion that is evil and humankind and its disciplines in science that are “good.”
All parts of human nature are specifically tuned for evolutionary requirements, and ones that are exceptional are just that, mutations and random effects.
Killing, incest, rape, cannibalism, and other extreme acts are not “un-natural” and therefore not “evil.” They are exceptions of course, and probably not traits practiced by most social groups.
Humanism is an indifferent understanding of human nature in conditions which are meaningless, that is, there is nothing more than humanity to understand anything as there is no transcendent God.
“Evil” is a plotline. It can’t exist without an elaborate discourse and as such it is subject to severe critique.
“For the closest shave, use Ockams razor”- Xanderman
No alients, spirits, etc. None of that either? Nothing more “superior” then man on his tiny speck of universal dust?
Why not seek to quench the cosmic thirst of transcendance? And not compedatively, not simply man against man?
I didn’t say no aliens, but no I don’t believe in Cartesian spirits.
What do you mean “superior”? Sure, I might believe there are aliens somewhere that have “better” technology and who might be “smarter” and/or physically “better,” whatever. But you are reaching for something Cartesian, something dualistic, something beyond experience, and if it was there you couldn’t know about it anyway so don’t bother.