To what extent are Liberals united in their views on human nature (24)

Para 1: The ways in which liberals are united on Human Nature:

(All Liberals see humans as rational beings guided by reasons and self-interest)

• Beginning in the period of the Enlightenment, liberalism marked a major shift in how human nature was viewed and understood. Rather than a view of human nature rooted in Christianity and the idea of original sin, liberals such as John Locke argued that humans are rational and guided by reason.

  • They therefore saw human nature in a very optimistic light, emphasising humans’ ability to achieve individual and societal progress through analysing problems and proposing solutions.

  • Rather than accepting God’s will, liberals therefore argued that individuals could shape their own outcomes.

  • They argued they would do this in a self-interested manner, but that rationality and virtuous impulses would mean they were also reasonable and not too competitive/destructive of each other.

  • This optimistic, rationalistic view of human nature was key to Locke’s political views. He rejected the 17th century structure of authority based in divine right and argued instead for authority being based on a Social Contract between the state and the governed, which individuals would only submit to if it was rational to do so and the state would serve their interests.

  • This also influenced John Rawls’ political views in Theory of Justice. He argued that faced with a ‘veil of ignorance’, according to which individuals wouldn’t know where they would end up in a society, they would choose a society which is much more equal and gives much more support to the disadvantaged, due to human nature being rational and empathetic.

Para 1: The ways in which Liberals are united on Human Nature (There is agreement that women are equal to men but are held back by society)

Mary Wollstonecraft and Betty Friedan in particular are in agreement that women are equally as rational and equally as guided by reason as men are, but they are held back by society and unable to reach their full potential.

Wollstonecraft criticised the 18th century society in which she was writing for holding women back from reaching their full potential and treating them as if they were irrational. Women were treated as second class citizens and not granted the freedoms as men were, or treated as rational beings in the same way. They were rarely able to access paid employment or own land, whilst sacrificing the little individualism and freedom they had when entering marriage. Women were therefore unable to use their rationality for self-improvement as men were.

In order to tackle this, Wollstonecraft argued that women should be treated as rational individuals in the same way that men are and that giving women access to education so that they were able to develop their rational and reasonable faculties was key to this.

Friedan developed this critique in the 20th century and argued that even though women had been granted legal equality in many areas, they were still condemned to underachievement by illiberal attitudes and discrimination in society, which worked through cultural channels such as schools, religion and the media. This cultural conditioning falsely convinced many in society that inequality between men and women was determined by human nature.

Friedan sought to challenge this irrational assumption and allow women to pursue their self- interest through their own rationality. In order to do so, she advocated using the liberal state to introduce anti-discrimination laws and other measures in order to tackle this inequality.

Para 2: The ways in which Liberals are disunited on Human Nature (Liberals Disagree as to whether humans can pursue their goals without the stat)

• Though all liberals are driven by a view of human nature rooted in individualism and the rational pursuit of self-interest, there is a key disagreement as to the extent of this individualism and the extent to which individuals are able to pursue their goals without the help of the state.

  • Classical liberals were driven by a view of freedom as negative freedom, which saw freedom as the absence of restraint and argued that individuals should largely be left alone to pursue their own self-interest.

    • John Locke, for example, emphasise ‘self-help’ whereby individuals should be able to help themselves without help from the state and argued for a limited, ‘nightwatchman’ state that only adjudicated disputes when necessary and interfered little in people’s lives.

    • In the 19th century, John Stuart Mill developed this classical liberal approach to individualism somewhat in his shift to ‘individuality’ and developmental individualism. Mill didn’t just see liberty as a right, but also as a driver of human development and consequently didn’t just want to grant individuals freedom at present, but also ponder what individuals could become.

    • In order to do this, Mill promoted universal education in order to allow individuals to reach their potential. Wollstonecraft showed a similar emphasis on the role of education in promoting the rationality and individualism of women.

  • In contrast to classical liberals, modern liberals in the 20th century were driven by a view of freedom as positive freedom. This saw freedom and individualism not just as the absence of restraint, but in terms of having the resources and power to pursue one’s goals. Economically disadvantaged people, for example, aren’t free if they’re simply left alone. Humans therefore needed help from the state in order to pursue their self-interest.

    • John Rawls drew a distinction between legal equality and ‘foundational equality’, arguing that individuals also needed greater social and economic equality in order to be free. In order to promote this freedom, he argued for an enabling state which used significant progressive taxation and extensive public service provision in order to help the most disadvantaged and give them a basic level of economic freedom in order to pursue their self-interest as rational individuals.

What is the overall argument?

Overall, liberals are united in their views of human nature to a large extent.

Whilst there are certainly differences in their beliefs on the extent to which individualism can be pursued without the help of the state, these differences are outweighed by the fact that the views of all liberals are driven by a view of human nature as rational and self-seeking .