Lange 1

Evan Lange
English Composition 2
Sarah Hughes
2/29/16
Evaluation Essay
One of the most widely believed claims in all of humanity, which seeps into the
roots of our culture and the worlds culture, is that of human nature. This claim states that
human nature is evil or flawed and that all of humanity is destined to destroy and
obstruct. There is no hope except for that which religion has to offer; the gods and
goddesses are our only guides to any sort of good in a world riddled with brutality and
death. While this is something that large majorities of people believe, I refuse to accept
this ideal. I have very good reasons to believe that this is an idea and concept that has not
been around for a very long time and that hundreds of thousands of years of human
history work against this claim. While humans are commonly cited as being flawed based
on observational evidence, including war and greed, these practices have not always been
in place. Humans lived respectfully and territorially for a very long time, shared
compassion with their neighbors, and lived close to the earth rather than against it for
thousands of years prior to modern history.
There is much archaeological evidence suggesting that our human ancestors lived
in societies and cultures for thousands of years before our present time. Human ancestors
not being distant ancestors in the gene pool, but Homo Sapiens and Homo Sapien
Sapiens. These are the people that currently walk the earth and have for a very long time.
For the most part, this does not get brought up when discussing human history nor is it

Lange 2
something that most people are educated about or aware of. Part of the reason that so
many people still believe that humans are fundamentally flawed is because of the fact that
these distant human ancestors and cultures arent recognized as being close in relation to
whom we are as a people now. They are viewed as separate from who we are and in turn
the modern human culture that we created and that we experience daily becomes
synonymous with human nature rather than being viewed for what it is, a social
construction. In an article written for the anthropology department at Palomar College, it
is stated, Current data suggest that modern humans evolved from archaic humans
primarily in East Africa. A 195,000 year old fossil from the Omo 1 site in Ethiopia
shows the beginnings of the skull changes that we associate with modern people,
including a rounded skull case and possibly a projecting chin. One might be skeptical
about this information because it is not necessarily suggesting that the same humans that
walk the earth now are the ones that lived back then. In another site in South Africa,
anatomically modern human remains have been found dating back to 110,000 years ago.
The argument here is that modern humans have been around for a lot longer then we tend
to believe.
A very large point that is posed when arguing that human nature is flawed is
stating that humans are born to destroy and take place in savagery. Just look around, these
things happen all of the time. One doesnt have to observe for too long to see that in this
world, there are people starving due to a lack of resources fueled by wars that a lot of
times people might say are unjustified. The argument is that humans are born to do these
things and that the bloodshed and savagery is part of a fate that was decided when human
kind was created. In an article written at the University of Texas, author Eric Pianka

Lange 3
proclaims, As Nietzsche pointed out, human nature is fundamentally flawed. He then
compares Niezsches views to that of Mark Twains. Mark Twain blames God for the
flawed human nature. Pianka quotes him saying, He asserts that humans are a "lousy
invention," fundamentally flawed, and that criticizing us is like "hitting a child." He went
on to say that we have "no control", no "will", and are compelled to commit sins. "God is
responsible for every act and word of a human being's life between cradle and grave."
This ties back to the beginning of the essay when it was said that we feel as if there is no
hope and we need the Gods and Goddesses to save us from our sins. The only issue with
this belief is that it will only continue to perpetuate the violence and destruction
happening in the world. The only way to counteract these atrocities are to accept the
undeniable fact the humans are not flawed and that our early ancestors acted in ways that
are completely contrary to the actions we see displayed by humans now. If we can prove
that humans have acted with compassion for generations prior to modern human history,
we would be able to assert that human nature is not fundamentally flawed but that the
behaviors of our modern culture, which we might date back to around 8000 BC, have
stemmed and evolved from a change in the way societies operated.
We can say that there were many changes that took place around this time period,
but one very important change that happened was the way people were interacting. War
becomes something that was not just a test of tribal strength but it became a way of
overthrowing ones neighbor in order to take advantage of the resources that they might
have. A lot of anthropologists will point to population growth as a reason for this pushing
of boundaries that forced many people to take place in this warfare that may have
resulted and massacres and annexing of local territories. Different tribes had nowhere to

Lange 4
go and this is when we start to see agriculture take place. While that may have been
enough, there were certain peoples or cultures that felt as if they had push the limit of
what it meant to be involved in war. In Dan Quinns book Ishmael he explains, Whats
working is that cultural identities and cultural borders are being preserved. When X
attacks Y, it doesnt annex it. It doesnt destroy Ys identity or erase its borders, it just
inflicts a certain amount of damage, then turns around and goes home. Its no different
when Y attacks X. In other words, every attack serves as a demonstration and affirmation
of identity to both sides: Were X and youre Y, and heres the border between us. We
cross it at our risk, and you cross it at yours. We know youre strong and healthy. Every
once in a while, were going to make sure you know were strong and healthy too. We
know that if we mess with you, well suffer. We want you to know that if you mess with
us, youll suffer too. We can see this taking place, especially with ancient tribal societies
in New Zealand. The difference between warfare we see back then and warfare we see
now is the element of honor and respect that is missing. In an article on traditional Maori
warfare it was commonplace to make peace. At the end of a war it was vital to make
peace. Sometimes arranged marriages between the victors and high-ranking women of
the defeated tribes were used to seal peace.
We can see in this way that modern humans have been around for a very long
time and the violence that took place never acted on a scale that we see today. **Im
starting to take a different stance on this argument as I write this paper and new
information emerges that I hadnt known before. I wonder now if warfare and
competitive violence are apart of human nature? I think it would not necessarily then
make human nature flawed. I think a big concern would be that the violence we see now

Lange 5
is far more grandiose than what weve seen in the past. The difference being that now we
see people killing for the sake of killing and all these atrocities taking place on a large
scale. That is what convinces people that we are flawed. Though, we have evidence
suggesting that while violence may have occurred amongst our ancestors, it was a more
primitive and territorial violence resulting in a need for resources. There was much more
respect and honor when it came to this sort of thing. When we see evidence suggesting
that distant ancestors were barbaric, could this possibly stem from an unwillingness to see
what was actually taking place? Especially when we see things involving sacrifice and
the use of woman and children as slaves? I feel like it may have a little more depth than
that.