What do you think?
Rate this book
The Battle for Human Nature: Science, Morality and Modern Life
“Provocative and richly textured. . . .Schwartz’s analyses of the inadequacies of contemporary scientific views of human nature are compelling, but the consequences are even more worthy of note.” ― Los Angeles Times Out of the investigations and speculations of contemporary science, a challenging view of human behavior and society has emerged and gained strength. It is a view that equates “human nature” utterly and unalterably with the pursuit of self-interest. Influenced by this view, people increasingly appeal to natural imperatives, instead of moral ones, to explain and justify their actions and those of others.
- GenresNonfiction
352 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 1986
29 people are currently reading
335 people want to read
About the author
Barry Schwartz
49 books593 followers an American psychologist. Schwartz is the Dorwin Cartwright Professor of Social Theory and Social Action at Swarthmore College. He frequently publishes editorials in the New York Times applying his research in psychology to current events.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
October 28, 2021
Not bad, but after processing the main theme of the book (that not all of human nature can be neatly encapsulated by rational economic self-interest, evolutionary drives, and behavioral conditioning), a lot of it starts to feel repetitive. His specific examples of the various ways that these theories fall short of explaining human behavior are really engaging, but over the course of 300 pages starts to feel rambley and unnecessary.
On the plus side, this makes an excellent addition to my anti-capitalist bookshelf! His two chapters on the danger of economic imperialism (which, oddly enough, are the ones we skipped for the class this is for, even though our professor has some thinly-veiled left-leaning beliefs), are STUNNING, elegantly reasoned descriptions of how taking an economic approach to every sphere of life would destroy mankind, both in terms of value and, like, literal existence. So that’s neat!
On the plus side, this makes an excellent addition to my anti-capitalist bookshelf! His two chapters on the danger of economic imperialism (which, oddly enough, are the ones we skipped for the class this is for, even though our professor has some thinly-veiled left-leaning beliefs), are STUNNING, elegantly reasoned descriptions of how taking an economic approach to every sphere of life would destroy mankind, both in terms of value and, like, literal existence. So that’s neat!
December 18, 2019
What a waste of time. I should have listened to Dennis Wrong's review in The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/1986/07/06/boo...
«a lengthy pamphlet against … neoclassical economics, evolutionary biology, …… and Skinnerian behaviorism».
There's nothing to add, it's just useless. I have read it as a source for my PhD because it takes up a common distinction in psychology from professional orientations originally introduced in Bellah et al.'s "Habits of the Heart" (1985). The level, however, is not worthy of a scientific discussion and too banal even for an everyday discussion.
«a lengthy pamphlet against … neoclassical economics, evolutionary biology, …… and Skinnerian behaviorism».
There's nothing to add, it's just useless. I have read it as a source for my PhD because it takes up a common distinction in psychology from professional orientations originally introduced in Bellah et al.'s "Habits of the Heart" (1985). The level, however, is not worthy of a scientific discussion and too banal even for an everyday discussion.
June 9, 2023
The ‘Battle for Human Nature’ was written about 40 years ago, but it speaks to life in the 21st century just as much – if not more – than the 20th century. The author’s fears – voiced in the 80s – about where society is headed seem to have materialized in the 21st century.
Schwartz takes on three separate disciplines in his book: economics, evolutionary biology and psychology (behavior theory). These 3 disciplines converge in their description of what man ‘is’. Schwartz criticizes the attempts of researchers in these 3 disciplines to deduce ‘rules’ about the nature of man as unchangeable as the laws of physics. Schwartz emphatically argues that man’s nature is nothing like the laws of gravity on a vase.
Schwartz disagrees with the idea that whatever we can find about human nature in a lab setting is a static, immutable truth about human nature and spends many chapters of the books both to point out the holes in this idea and to present his alternative: human nature *can* come down to maximizing individual preference and the desire to replicate, but it can also be so much more. The urgency felt throughout the book is to due to Schwartz’s belief that humanity cannot survive on economic imperialism and fulfillment of individual needs alone.
On the one hand, I think that the idea of giving up on some individual freedom/wealth is actually not antithetical to personal interests: e.g. I stop at a red light because I understand that ultimately, living in a law-abiding society serves my personal security, safety and wellbeing . I can choose to buy into economic healthcare because a healthy population is much less of a burden to my government. So, I’m not sure that economic imperialism will completely ruin the human race as we know it. On the other hand, do think that our society needs to reckon with how much individual needs and wants have been put on a pedestal and ask ourselves whether this is just human nature or whether we can do something better with this world, rising above our human nature, if we look past our individual interests and wellbeing. When everything we pursue in life is judged by a very narrow set of 'what will this do for me' principles, the bottom line is that more often than not, our society empties itself of empathy, love an kindness. Do we really want that kind of society? Schwartz argues that we may be headed for it, but it is not inevitable.
Schwartz takes on three separate disciplines in his book: economics, evolutionary biology and psychology (behavior theory). These 3 disciplines converge in their description of what man ‘is’. Schwartz criticizes the attempts of researchers in these 3 disciplines to deduce ‘rules’ about the nature of man as unchangeable as the laws of physics. Schwartz emphatically argues that man’s nature is nothing like the laws of gravity on a vase.
Schwartz disagrees with the idea that whatever we can find about human nature in a lab setting is a static, immutable truth about human nature and spends many chapters of the books both to point out the holes in this idea and to present his alternative: human nature *can* come down to maximizing individual preference and the desire to replicate, but it can also be so much more. The urgency felt throughout the book is to due to Schwartz’s belief that humanity cannot survive on economic imperialism and fulfillment of individual needs alone.
On the one hand, I think that the idea of giving up on some individual freedom/wealth is actually not antithetical to personal interests: e.g. I stop at a red light because I understand that ultimately, living in a law-abiding society serves my personal security, safety and wellbeing . I can choose to buy into economic healthcare because a healthy population is much less of a burden to my government. So, I’m not sure that economic imperialism will completely ruin the human race as we know it. On the other hand, do think that our society needs to reckon with how much individual needs and wants have been put on a pedestal and ask ourselves whether this is just human nature or whether we can do something better with this world, rising above our human nature, if we look past our individual interests and wellbeing. When everything we pursue in life is judged by a very narrow set of 'what will this do for me' principles, the bottom line is that more often than not, our society empties itself of empathy, love an kindness. Do we really want that kind of society? Schwartz argues that we may be headed for it, but it is not inevitable.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews