Structure of Human Behavior - Essay Example

Human Nature Jean-Jacques Rousseau, John Stuart Mill and Karl Marx are each political thinkers with their own views and ideas in regards to what human nature is and what they each feel controls the behavior of humans. With their findings and their personal views, they have each decided on and have mapped out a structure for human behavior that is based on government, laws, and authority. Some of these structures can be helpful for a properly functioning human society while others are not. While some of those involve the actual civilians in the plans, the other structures depend on the governing of elected officials. Rousseau viewed humans as being born free but, after being born, subjecting to being in slave-like situations; "[...] but everywhere he is in chains." Rousseau states that while a man believes himself free, he is at the opposite end of the spectrum, meaning that he allows himself to conform to the rules and laws set down to him. He does not stand up for his freedom and his rights as an individual. Rousseaus concept is that human behavior is controlled by the emotions of the humans, though he feels that they should become more concerned for the society as a whole, as well as for themselves. Humans have the ability to come together, but to only think for themselves when their own freedom is at stake. Mills view of human nature is completely different from that of Rousseau; Mill believed that society is above the individual. The individuals, on the other hand, had different ideas as to how things should go, feeling that they were not getting as much attention as individuals should have been, that their needs were not being met. Mill felt that man wanted to have some power over those that were controlling them, so that those authoritative beings could not abuse their power, especially if it effected the individual citizens. Mill believed that humans needed to be under some form of authority, yet the humans thought it would be best if they also had a say in what went on in regards to how they were tended to. Mills concept of human behavior was controlled by the economic environment, even though there was controversy regarding the entire thing, mainly from the side of the humans that were being controlled. Man wanted to remain as individuals, but they did not know that they were capable of doing this in a social setting. Marxs view on human nature, however, revolves more around his concept of communism. Communism is when the state takes charge and controls the wealth and property of those within that state. The state is also what controls the economy. Communism is the power that controls the people. So it is the economic environment that shapes human nature under the thoughts of Marx; Marx believed that it was the nature of humans to be controlled by a greater power, and it was communism that supplied the control in this case. Marx felt that humans should not be viewed as individuals, but as a whole society, and that they should be treated as such. However, Marx also had an affinity for socialism, which involved products and wealth being controlled by the people, so this contradicted the ideas of communism. It also shows the stance that humans had on both of the concepts. They did not want to be controlled by a higher power, and they did not want to be in the way if that higher power became corrupt. The society felt that they should have more of a say in regards to them. It is this that shows that Marx believed that humans can shape their own nature, but only to an extent - the rest should be done by a controlling group. He seemed to think that they were capable in some regards, but needed authoritative power otherwise. The separate views of the three different thinkers vary from how a person thinks of themselves and how they should really think of themselves in terms of a society, of a mass of individuals. Rousseaus concept involved humans as being free in nature, but slaved as a member of society; Mills view was that human nature was above that of a societal nature, that the humans should have a decent amount of control to avoid corruption and disaster with the government that would run them; Marxs ideology was that humans should be entirely controlled by a higher power, though socialism was another concept that would come into play, allowing the people to have a limited amount of control. According to Rousseaus idea of human nature and behavior, humans should be more aware of their position in society and not just of themselves as individuals. They are more concerned with themselves as individuals, choosing to side on their own when faced with a choice that needs to be decided by the society as a whole. A man feels that his freedom is threatened when he is viewed in regards to society; when he is with society, he can no longer think for himself and must consider the rest of society. Rousseau believed that a society had to be a group effort and that the individual man should set his needs aside and focus on the bigger picture; the source of authority in Rousseaus theory was the society itself, and its purpose was to work together instead of against each other as individuals. Mills structure for society involved the individuals, the society, being controlled by a higher power. However, the individuals and the whole of society was against this structure, fearing that there could only be corruption with someone having that much power over that many people. This did not change the fact that Mills felt that people would be better if they did not have control over themselves, because that could only lead to a clash of ideas and of everyone else trying to take charge of everything. Under rule or not, Mills idea of society would have been a contradiction. Marx was under the impression that people would function best if they were left with nothing in their care. Their property, wealth, their means of production - all of this would belong to the state. Marx based all of this on historical happenings, realizing that the economy would run more smooth if all of the aspects of wealth and production were kept in the hands of people who apparently knew what they were doing. Horror would only ensue if people were able to keep what was rightfully theirs. Socialism came in after communism, again under Marx, though this was in the favor of the people taking control of their production goods. This structure allowed the people to be their own authority (with outside authority, of course), so they were able to keep what was fairly theirs; this includes any mishaps that came their way, none of that belonged to the higher powers anymore. The transition from communism to socialism showed that people developed not only as a society, but as individuals. It was because of this that they were granted a little more control over themselves and their production situations. Of all the structures in which humans could live by, I agree most with Rousseaus concept, that people can function as individuals but they need to forget about their personal views and opinions when it comes to the whole of society. "The needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few" can be applied to this concept. This is a societal structure that allows the actual society to decide of and take charge of their own needs. The other structures by the other social thinkers damper down what the society is able to do, choosing to put all of the decisions into the hands of a higher power. More often than not, the society is not thought of when the authoritative powers is considering something, they only assume that what they are doing is right for the society as a whole. This is not often the case; the society may have different ideas which may be more beneficial in the long run. Read More