Analysis Of Switzgebel's Discussion Of "Natural"

514 Words3 Pages
Hayoung Kim (2008190068) Professor Erik Harris Comparative Political Philosophy March 31, 2010 Short Assignment 1: Analysis of Schwitzgebel’s Discussion of “Natural” Schwitzgebel criticizes Hobbes and Rousseau’s thoughts on the natural state of humans since the context is one in which a state or social structure is absent (147). Schwitzgebel claims that humans cannot be analyzed in isolation to social context, thus human “behavior within social structure is their natural behavior” (148). Schwitzgebel then proceeds on the assumed notion that this social structure is a stable one and the environment is normal and healthy. He believes that the key to studying the natural state of humans is in the process of development or growth. To say that a particular trait is ‘natural’ is to say that it has not been subjected to any external influence. Thus looking at what kinds of characteristics are developed reveals whether human traits are moral or immoral to begin with. Schwitzgebel’s presumes to determine the best type of moral education based on whether ‘morality’ is developed naturally (through self-reflection) or needs to be imposed (through education) (162). Schwitzgebel’s views can be used to interpret Mengzi’s Ox Mountain passage. On the mountain, there are beautiful trees and growing sprouts. This is their ‘natural’ state in a normal environment that allows rest and rain. However, when ‘hatchets and axes’ and ‘oxen and sheep’ appear, the beautiful plants change along with the mountain’s landscape. These ‘hatchets and axes’ and ‘oxen and sheep’ are what Schwitzgebel would call “external impositions.” These change the mountain’s natural state (151). Schwitzgebel’s argument, however, is based on some unquestioned assumptions. He assumes that the ‘environment’ will be normal and healthy. Not only can the term ‘normal’ be interpreted in various ways,
Open Document