The Western Illusion of Human Nature: With Reflections on the Long History of Hierarchy, Equality and the Sublimation of Anarchy in the West, and ... Conceptions of the Human Condition (Paradigm)

A very good book, if the reader is interested in engaging critically with the cultural world around them. The book speaks of certain forms of ethnocentrism, and of some of the effects of ethnocentrism.

Sahlins' lengthy essay is an aggressively tedious read. It is almost as if the author went to considerable lengths to render his work as incomprehensible as possible. The writing is about as opaque as it can get. The purpose of such a work, if I understand correctly, is to elucidate an idea and edify the reader. This, in my opinion, might be best achieved through the use of simple, declarative sentences. Instead Sahlins employs an obnoxiously obtuse and overtly complicated style. Because of this, most of his work can be taken to mean absolutely anything or, conversely, absolutely nothing at all. Query: how is one to engage with a work, to argue for its intellectual merit or the paucity thereof, when one has no idea what the author is trying to say?If one is patient enough to tease out the meaning of Sahlins' work, a rather simple point emerges: that Sahlins believes the Western perception of "human nature" is the product of historical and cultural contingency, not a reflection of careful scientific reasoning and empirical evidence. There is partial merit to this. While the Hobbesian view that, in the absence of centralized authority and the rule of law, human life is "nasty, brutish, and short" is at best an oversimplification, there is insight to be found in the realization that something like a "human nature" does exist. Sahlins' browbeating is primarily concerned with a very specific and rather outdated perception of human nature. Considering his decision to use Hobbes' "Leviathan" as his archetype for Western views on human nature, this should come as no surprise. Sahlins seems to be debating E.O. Wilson and Napoleon Chagnon in the 1970s and 1980s rather than any of the researchers involved in the extant study of "human nature" (i.e. Darwinian explanations). True, he might have something to say to those extant thinkers guilty of the most grievous abuses of evolutionary psychology. But he fails to recognize that a lot of researchers pursuing Darwinian explanations for human behavior operate with considerably more nuance and sophistication, well aware of the phenomenal range of behavioral plasticity exhibited by humans.To briefly summarize, Sahlins makes a relatively simple (disingenuously simple, perhaps) point in an exceedingly convoluted way. Since the man is in his 80s, it's probably too much to ask, but I'd highly recommend he take a writing course before putting pen to paper (or fingers to keys) in the future.

this is an exciting and thought provoking piece by mr sahlins that contains his personal reflections on historical interpretations of a certain kind of human behaviouri, personally, disagree with him on two counts. first, what he labels as the 'western illusion of human nature', that, basically, humans are savage by nature, is not a western illusion. it is an interpretation of observation that, although distributes in space and time unevenly, certainly does not peak in 'the west'. second, it is not 'of human nature'. it is about a particular kind of human behaviour that can occur under certain conditionsan intriguing, informative and occasionally challenging read. the three stars reflect not as much the value of the book than, say, the extent of my agreement with it

Unlike the other reviewer here, my rating doesn't relate to the degree to which I agree or disagree with this or that in this book, but rather the quality of the book itself. It's very thought provoking, short, insightful, and useful to a reader pondering human nature or other culture concepts. It's also very densely written, and wanders in tone from seriousness to coyness. I suppose the former is to be expected in a short work tackling such a complex topic - the author would no doubt wish to cover all his bases as deeply as possible, hence, dense, sometimes convoluted writing. The latter is an academic tic one may or may not want to forgive. For these reasons I'm rating it less than the five it would otherwise deserve.As to the content, I don't think the other reviewer quite grasped it, although it's hard to really know what she's talking about since he provides no evidence of her own to qualify or back up her simple assertions that what Sahlins is discussing is actually universal. I'm really not sure what she means when she says "it's a well documented aspect of human nature" and "it is not about human nature [but] about human behavior under certain specific conditions."This makes no sense. Sahlins is arguing that the concept of "human nature" as utilized in Western Civilization excludes culturally and socially mediated behaviors, and thus pits an imagined "culture-less human animal and behavior" against the culturally-informed behavior that is dependent on society and circumstances. This is a very strange, very distorting point of view to have. Evidence suggests that, to the extent that there is a base "human nature," it includes social activity and culture, without which no human is fully human. Our pre-human ancestors had culture, which influenced evolution of current humans. In other words, our biology has evolved along with our aptitude for culture, and to speak of "human behavior" is to speak of culturally-informed behavior.So, to claim that Sahlins is writing about some sort of ideology that is couched in "human behavior under certain specific conditions" is in actuality to make his exact point for him; and to say that it is somehow both contingent on specific conditions, and also universal, is oxymoronic. The ideology of "human nature" as separate and below our aptitude for culture is in fact a culturally specific belief on its own.Cheers,Adam

Excellent

Sehr eingängiges und tiefschürfendes kleines Buch des bekannten, kritischen Sozial-Anthropologen. Er räumt darin auf mit vielen Vorurteilen und angeblichen, bekannten Tatsachen bezüglich westlich ausgerichteter Naturbeherrschung und daraus abgleiteter, zivilisatorischer Dominanz der westlich geprägten, ausschweifenden Un-Kultur.Nur für Kenner und Genießer, bessere Englisch Kenntnisse unbedingt erforderlich.

Sarei molto più cattivo con Thomas Hobbes. Come si permette di "definire" priam e "giudicare" poi la ineffabile e inafferrabile "natura" umana' Ha mai amato un essere umano? un topolino, un fiore, una cascatella di acqua? Leggete Biophilia di E.O.Wilson e altri. Aktri autori nefasti e lodati da tutti sono Niccolò Machiavelli che eleva a "scienza" l'arte dell'inganno (astuzia=volpe) e l'arte della violenza (forza letale=leone). Per avere un'idea delle proposte "politiche" di ser Niccolò Machiavelli leggete "Descrizione del modo tenuto dal Duca Valentino nello ammazzare Vitellozzo Vitelli, Oliverotto da Fermo, il Signor Pagolo e il duca di Gravina Orsini", scritta nel 1503, che potete trovare qui:[...]

Mr. Sahlins knows what he is talking about as he shows in this book. What interests me most, however, is his criticism on Western culture and it takes a long time before he reaches this point.