Western Civilization

Self/Group in Civilization

The self/group axis is fundamental to the Darwinian survival and evolution of all advanced life on this planet.  This includes all advanced species and individuals within species.  The self/group orientation of individuals within a species is critical to the survival of the species.  In the animal world, the self/group orientation of individuals within the species is based upon vision-based behavior and cognition.  We humans have developed left brain cognition that overlays our right brain self/group orientation.

Human bonding and individual contribution to the good of the group have been central tenets of human groups since our days as hunter-gatherers.  As discussed earlier, there are 2 primary human needs that motivate humans:

• Self-desires - which are self-serving
• Group-responsibility – an inner need to contribute to the group - which is more altruistic

Which of these is the best motivator?  Clearly we know some people who are very strongly motivated by making money for their own personal consumption.  They are not very interested in the fate of their fellow humans nor in the value of their contributions to the group.  On the other hand, some people are “givers” and are primarily driven by the value that they bring to others and to society.  Both of these needs operate simultaneously in most people - each person requiring a certain level of self protection and comfort and each person also deriving meaning in life by a sense of worthiness that comes from contributing to others or to the whole.  The balance can be different across individuals.

Self/Group in Western Civilization

Western Civilization stands on the pillars of science, capitalism and democracy.  These collectively serve as surrogates for the classic role of god and religion in most previous and many current civilizations.  How does this triumvirate meet our human needs and how does it motivate humans to contribute to group success in comparison to religious-based civilizations?
 

Capitalism and democracy as human motivators

Capitalism operates through the medium of money – it places value upon and provides an exchange rate for human effort, pain and pleasure.  Capitalism encourages group-responsibility behavior, but it is not guided by it. Capitalism, by itself, is not concerned with truth – this guidance comes from science; nor is it concerned with fairness – this guidance comes from democracy.

Capitalism is Darwinian insofar as it rewards the fittest – i.e. those who contribute the most to civilization.  This is good for civilization.  Capitalism uses money to compensate people for their contributions.  Money is used to satisfy the needs for protection and comfort of the Ego. 

Capitalism primarily motivates by satisfying the needs of our self-desires - not by satisfying our group-responsibility needs.  Capitalism does not directly motivate us by our more noble and altruistic needs - but, instead, motivates us by our more selfish needs.

Ultimately, however, it is group success that is most important to the success of human beings.  Capitalism has no protection mechanism for the comfort and safety of weaker individuals compared to stronger individuals.  Capitalism does not motivate individuals according to the needs of the group.  On the contrary, capitalism motivates according to meeting individual needs, not according to meeting the group needs (or, the will of god). 

Does motivating humans by satisfying their self-interests, as capitalism does, serve the needs of the group? 

Adam Smith (1723-1790), in his famous treatise “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations” provided the theoretical construct for the free-market economy that is an integral part of capitalism.  He argued that individual self-interest guides the most efficient use of resources and that the public good is best accomplished with a free market system.  The application of these free-market theories has been wildly successful - resulting in the large success of our current Western Civilization.  Capitalism has led our group success primarily by motivating individuals according to their self-desires.   

Capitalism does serve the needs of the group.  It does so by coordinating people who are individually motivated by self-interests.  Through a free market the values of services and goods are determined by the value of each to the group. In this manner the needs of the group are satisfied and the rewards that people receive from them are likewise established.  Ideally, those who bring the greatest value to the group also receive the largest personal rewards.  It is a very clever system.

Democracy stands for fairness and equality for each person.  Each person has input into the government and each person is also guaranteed certain freedoms.   As such, democracy is a good counter balance to capitalism.  One of the strengths of US democracy is the two-party system.  The Republican Party leans towards representing capitalism and the Democratic Party towards democracy and individual rights.  The ebb and flow of power between the two parties allows for a healthy management of the balance between capitalism and democracy.  The table below shows the alternation of power between republican and democrat.  This flexibility in the system is necessary for our nation (especially as leader of Western Civilization) to deal with changing internal and external factors – much as a tree sways in the wind.  However, it could be argued that the current balance of power between republican and democrat is so balanced as to be stale-mated.

Table. With only one exception, largely based upon the Carter presidency only being 4 years, the US has alternated between 8 years of Republican and 8 years of democratic presidency since World War II.

The Cold War, which was “fought” for more than forty years from the end of World War II up until 1989 with the fall of the Berlin Wall, was a great struggle over two systems – effectively to determine which of the two competing systems was most successful.  Capitalism had greater survival value and, in a Darwinian sense, “won”.  The communist system concentrated on the individual worker.  There was much less reliance on money as a motivator - people were generally compensated relatively equally and the primary motivator was the desire for success of the community.  The economy and allocation of resources within it was largely planned by the government.

The communist system directly motivated people primarily on the basis of their altruistic and purer needs to contribute to the whole.  Although it may be a sad commentary on humans, capitalism won out over purists and those who believe in altruism as a strong motivator. 

Although capitalism motivates individuals according to their self-desires, and does not directly motivate according to the needs of the group, paired with democracy it was a more successful system than communism.  Although the combination of capitalism and democracy won the Cold War, it does not mean there can’t be a better system. We must question whether this strategy is the appropriate one to carry Homo sapiens into our future.
 

Science and religion

In today’s world of science we have very accurately described the external world - and continue to do so more fully and precisely.  In the earliest civilizations and some current ones, God has guided man into the unknown.  Is it possible that science can now take the place of God?  Do we now know everything - or at least have the methodology (the scientific method) by which to know and understand everything?  Science seems clever at answering most questions about the external world.  It is also unlikely that science will ever be able to truly discover the essence of what it is to be human.  Science will probably never be able to totally eliminate the need for belief in a higher truth such as God.  It will certainly help to get us closer, but it will likely never provide a complete understanding of life.  Science has probably never answered a question that did not also result in asking several new ones.  The job of science will never be done.

In today’s world of science we have very accurately described the external world - and continue to do so more fully and precisely.  Traditionally, God has guided man into the unknown.  Is it possible that science can now take the place of God?  …almost certainly not.

In Western Civilization, religion (based upon God) and science have been in opposition to one another.  However, this is largely because science has disputed several specific aspects of religious dogma – such as the creation.  Religions have been inflexible in addressing such conflicts.  These conflicts notwithstanding, God still plays a needed role in Western Civilization. Science will never be able to answer all of life’s questions; and Western Civilization does not have the Eastern orientation towards seeking the right-brain truths about life.  God, in Western Civilization, helps to maintain orientation towards the truths of life contained in the right brain.

There should not be a clash between science and god.  God represents the very essence of life and what it is to be human; and science is simply the human method of investigating the world around us.  We need them both.
 

Summary

Capitalism has very successfully motivated people according to self-desires.  The results have been astounding in terms of material wealth and meeting self-serving desires.  The free-market economy, as per Adam Smith, has been particularly clever at motivating individuals by self-desires in a way that their contributions are coordinated for phenomenal group success.  Western Civilization has thrived because of this group success - nearly entirely attained by self-desire motivation.

Democracy structures our system for fairness and provides governance and justice.  Democracy is a logical companion of the individualism of the Greeks.  Even though it springs from individualism, by allowing each person a voice in group decisions and management, it also primarily meets the needs of the group. Although democracy does not serve as a primary motivator for people - it plays the role of an organizer.

Likewise, science is not a human motivator.  Science is the ultimate arbiter of truth and, in this way, serves one of the roles of God and religion. However, one of the primary roles of religion has been to motivate behavior according to our group-responsibility.  Science does not serve that role.

The triumvirate of Western Civilization strongly motivates people according to self-desires (through capitalism), but does not directly motivate people by group-responsibility.  The success of the group (Western Civilization) has been accomplished by a capitalistic and free-market system that coordinates the contributions of individuals who are each largely motivated by self-interests. Democracy serves the needs of the group, but even it is likely driven more by self-interest because that is how many voters make ballot decisions.

On the other hand, the individual freedoms within Western Civilization certainly give individuals the freedom to be motivated by group-responsibility to the extent that they desire.  There is nearly complete freedom to pursue the higher-level satisfactions that derive from behavior motivated by group-responsibility.  In our civilization we are each completely free to be motivated by our needs for group-responsibility and to derive the highest levels of self-satisfaction associated with meeting those needs. 

In Western Civilization, group-responsibility is a direct individual human motivator only insofar as the satisfaction that individuals receive from such actions encourages such behavior.  For long-term success, is this enough?