Relations: How you Relate to Others and the World

If civilization is to survive, we must cultivate the science of human relationships - the ability of all peoples, of all kinds, to live together, in the same world at peace.

Franklin D. Roosevelt

What is the use of a house if you haven’t got a tolerable planet to put it on?

Henry David Thoreau

What is and ought to be our relationship to other humans? What is and ought to be our relationship to the natural world? What is culture and how does it impact our beliefs and behavior? How and why cultures change? What is the best possible political system we could aspire to? Is the human race going to survive forever or go extinct?

The focus of the Behavior section was on why humans behave as they do. One of the most critical aspects of behavior – for our well-being as well as our survival – is how we relate to other humans, and to nature and the living world, which is the subject of this chapter.

All psychological theories of well-being emphasize the importance of warm, trusting interpersonal relations. The humanist psychologist Abraham Maslow (Idea 14, forthcoming) described self-actualizers as those having strong feelings of empathy and affection for all human beings, and being capable of greater love, deeper friendship, and more complete identification with others than those who are not self-actualized. Carl Rogers, another leading humanist psychologist, described the fully functioning person as showing a basic trustworthiness of human nature.

But are humans trustworthy by nature? Most humans display behaviors that are quite the opposite from Maslow’s self-actualizers – we see all the time people who deceive and cheat (even from those we should expect better, like members of Congress.) We see people who reserve their empathy for their own kin. If there is any trait that we have retained since prehistorical times, it is tribality; we tend to favor our in-group at the expense of the out-group.

Reaching out to the “others” requires a willingness to do so, which draws from limited cognitive resources (Idea 15, forthcoming); social life is complex and demanding cognitively. I believe that a lot of the bitterness and alienation in the world flows from the fact that our social skills are inadequate for the complex, diverse society we now live in. The result is a highly polarized and divided society in which people inhabit their own “reality bubbles.” (Idea 11, forthcoming)

Despite our differences, humans exhibit universal patterns of behavior toward others; this is the result of their common evolutionary heritage as members of hierarchical, close-knitted groups. In fact, the human brain probably grew in complexity to keep up with the intricacy of human social interactions (Idea 10, forthcoming). What distinguishes us from other species is that we can make sophisticated assumptions regarding other people’s intentions. We can say something like “I know that he knows that I know that his intentions are not good.” We also have seen that many of our actions are unconscious, not willed. We see all the time, discrimination against people of different races (even among people who do not consider themselves bigots).

For all their shortcomings, humans are highly social animals. Understanding how humans relate to each other requires understanding how they create cultures and how, in turn, they are shaped by them. Certainly, our beliefs regarding the proper way to interact with others are largely influenced by culture. While the dominant norms of a society may shape our behavior, children first experience the influence of those cultural values through the attitudes and beliefs of their parents, which can significantly impact their psychological development and world outlook.

Those living in the so-called individualist cultures, such as in the US, in general, value individual autonomy and personal agendas more than group needs. Individualist cultures are primarily interested in pursuing personal goals and cooperating with others only when in so doing advances their personal interests. In a collectivist culture, in contrast, members place the welfare of the group above that of the individual. These are, of course, general trends since there are plenty of altruists in individualist cultures and self-centered people in collectivist ones.

Until recently, research in the West within the field of psychology focused mainly on its own WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic) populations, limiting the understanding of the influence of culture on behavior and on childhood development. Most of the knowledge that is represented in American and European textbooks is based on research done in the WEIRD group, which comprises only about 5% of the world population. It is only relatively recently that researchers have focused on interdependent societies, which emphasize relationality and a pervading awareness and responsiveness to others.[1]

But if humans want connection, why there is so much conflict? In his 1992 book, The End of History and the Last Man, the political scientist Francis Fukuyama famously argued that the advent of liberal democracy – which occurred after the Cold War (1945–1991) and the dissolution of the Soviet Union (1991) – signaled the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution, and the final form of human government. Since liberal democracies do not fight each other, the argument goes, conflicts and wars will abate as more countries adopt a democratic system.

Indeed, the end of the Cold War and the subsequent increase in the number of liberal democratic states were accompanied by a sudden and dramatic decline in total warfare, interstate wars, ethnic wars, and revolutionary wars.[2] However, this trend toward democratization changed in the early years of the 21st century. For example, the Arab Spring – a series of anti-government protests, uprisings and armed rebellions that spread across much of the Arab world in the 2010s – failed in its pro-democracy goals, and there was also the “backsliding” of democracy in several countries including Thailand, Turkey, Nicaragua, Philippines and Hungary.

According to the Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington, this is just the world reverting to a “normal” situation characterized by cultural conflict. In his 1996 work The Clash of Civilizations, he argues that people’s cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world. In his view, future wars would be fought not between countries, but between cultures. He also argues that the widespread Western belief in the universality of the West's values and political systems is naïve and that continued insistence on democratization and such “universal” norms will only further antagonize other civilizations.[3]

Another fly in the end-of-history ointment is the growth in the economic and political power of Russia and China. China has a one-party state government, while Russia, though presents itself as a democracy, is effectively an autocracy.

Also ominous is the resurgence of populism in the United States, the United Kingdom, and India, nominally the largest democracy in the world. The violent insurrection against the US Capitol, for example, reflect an undermining of democratic institutions in the United States. Many people have lost faith in the democratic process, and in the UK, voting numbers can be low. The question remains, what is the best political system we can hope for?

One of the most important aspects of our humanity is how we relate to nature and the living world. Indeed, the way humans ought to interact with nature is central to people’s worldviews. Throughout history, some cultures have sought mastery over nature, whereas others believe it essential to live in harmony with nature. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, humans were put on this Earth to fill it and subdue it and to “rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, and over every living creature that moves on the ground” (Genesis, 1:28). This attitude, however, is no longer viable. Human action has resulted in the extinction of many animal species and in the depletion of nonrenewable resources. Clearly, we must find a new, more sustainable way to relate to our planet. Our lives depend on it.

[1]“The WEIRD Science of Culture, Values, and Behavior,” by Kim Armstrong. APS, Mar 30, 2018. [2]Global Conflict Trends. Center for Systemic Peace. 2017. http://www.systemicpeace.org/conflicttrends.html. [3]Huntington, S. (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Simon & Schuster. See also, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clash_of_Civilizations#Criticism.