What do you think?
Rate this book
Why We Hate: Understanding the Roots of Human Conflict
An insightful and probing exploration of the contradiction between humans' enormous capacity for hatred and their evolutionary development as a social species
Why We Hate tackles a pressing issue of both longstanding interest and fresh relevance: why a social species like Homo sapiens should nevertheless be so hateful to itself. We go to war and are prejudiced against our fellow human beings. We discriminate on the basis of nationality, class, race,
sexual orientation, religion, and gender. Why are humans at once so social and so hateful to each other? In this book, prominent philosopher Michael Ruse looks at scientific understandings of human hatred, particularly Darwinian evolutionary theory. He finds the secret to this paradox in our
tribal evolutionary past, when we moved ten thousand years ago from being hunter-gatherers to agriculturalists--a shift that paved the way for modern civilization. Simply put, as Ruse paraphrases, our modern skulls house Stone Age minds.
Combining rigorous argument with an engaging and accessible style, Ruse makes frequent use of historical examples, examining the history of two World Wars, and the U.S. offensive against Iraq. He also gives many pertinent and up-to-date examples of prejudice, including the significance of Brexit
and the systemic racism that lead to the Black Lives Matter movement. Ruse pays special attention to egregious cases of hatred, such as the treatment of Jews by the Third Reich, and to pressing contemporary issues, including the status of women. Ruse concludes with constructive suggestions for
ways in which we might reconcile the contradictory aspects of our nature.
Why We Hate will be of interest and value to a wide range of readers interested in the role of human nature in current events, as well as to readers interested in philosophy, the life sciences, social sciences (especially anthropology and archaeology), and beyond.
Why We Hate tackles a pressing issue of both longstanding interest and fresh relevance: why a social species like Homo sapiens should nevertheless be so hateful to itself. We go to war and are prejudiced against our fellow human beings. We discriminate on the basis of nationality, class, race,
sexual orientation, religion, and gender. Why are humans at once so social and so hateful to each other? In this book, prominent philosopher Michael Ruse looks at scientific understandings of human hatred, particularly Darwinian evolutionary theory. He finds the secret to this paradox in our
tribal evolutionary past, when we moved ten thousand years ago from being hunter-gatherers to agriculturalists--a shift that paved the way for modern civilization. Simply put, as Ruse paraphrases, our modern skulls house Stone Age minds.
Combining rigorous argument with an engaging and accessible style, Ruse makes frequent use of historical examples, examining the history of two World Wars, and the U.S. offensive against Iraq. He also gives many pertinent and up-to-date examples of prejudice, including the significance of Brexit
and the systemic racism that lead to the Black Lives Matter movement. Ruse pays special attention to egregious cases of hatred, such as the treatment of Jews by the Third Reich, and to pressing contemporary issues, including the status of women. Ruse concludes with constructive suggestions for
ways in which we might reconcile the contradictory aspects of our nature.
Why We Hate will be of interest and value to a wide range of readers interested in the role of human nature in current events, as well as to readers interested in philosophy, the life sciences, social sciences (especially anthropology and archaeology), and beyond.
320 pages, Hardcover
Published September 2, 2022
9 people are currently reading
47 people want to read
About the author
Michael Ruse
131 books99 followersMichael Escott Ruse was a British-born Canadian philosopher of science who specialised in the philosophy of biology and worked on the relationship between science and religion, the creation–evolution controversy, and the demarcation problem within science. Ruse began his career teaching at The University of Guelph and spent many years at Florida State University.
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
December 20, 2023
The author attempts to understand why we hate but oddly does not seem to exhibit enough philosophical self-analysis to identify his own biases and prejudices. He finds fault with our tribal evolutionary past, when we moved ten thousand years ago from being hunter-gatherers to agriculturalists--a shift that paved the way for modern civilization. Simply put, as Ruse paraphrases, "our modern skulls house Stone Age minds."
On agriculture, there are a number of academics who offer critiques of the practice. Here are some current scholars who offer critical perspectives on the rise of agriculture and its implications:
1. James C. Scott: Known for his book "Against the Grain," Scott argues that the transition from hunter-gatherer societies to agriculture was not necessarily voluntary but often driven by social pressures and coercion. He highlights the potential loss of autonomy and increased inequality associated with the rise of complex civilizations dependent on large-scale farming.
2. Jared Diamond: In "Guns, Germs, and Steel," Diamond analyzes why some societies thrived after adopting agriculture while others did not. He argues that agriculture, while enabling population growth and technological advancements, also increased vulnerability to disease, warfare, and environmental degradation.
3. Vandana Shiva: A prominent ecofeminist scholar, Shiva criticizes the industrialization of agriculture and its negative impacts on biodiversity, soil health, and small-scale farmers. She advocates for sustainable farming practices based on ecological principles and traditional knowledge.
4. David Graeber and David Wengrow: In "The Dawn of Everything," Graeber and Wengrow challenge the traditional narrative that agriculture led directly to cities and social hierarchies. They argue that early civilizations often existed before large-scale farming and that cooperation and mutual aid played a significant role in social organization.
5. Charles C. Mann: Author of "1493: Uncovering the New World Columbus Created," Mann explores the devastating consequences of European colonization and the introduction of agriculture and invasive species on indigenous populations in the Americas. His work highlights the interconnectedness of environmental exploitation and social injustice.
It's important to note that these scholars offer diverse perspectives and don't necessarily share a unified critique of agriculture. Some emphasize its limitations, while others acknowledge its potential benefits while calling for more sustainable and equitable practices.
An easy target for the author is Donald Trump, to wit, his active libido and physical attraction to women while wanting to bed them down is described as a prejudice against women (pp. 109, 111, 112). If that is the case, then evolutionary biology would be quite different from how we view it currently.
Sexual selection is a mode of natural selection in which members of one biological sex choose mates of the other sex to mate with (intersexual selection), and compete with members of the same sex for access to members of the opposite sex (intrasexual selection). The author delights in the fact that Trump failed in one attempt of sexual conquest but some individuals have greater reproductive success than others within a population, for example because they are more attractive or prefer more attractive partners to produce offspring. Successful males benefit from frequent mating and monopolizing access to one or more fertile females. Females in turn can maximize the return on the energy they invest in reproduction by selecting and mating with the best males. The author would be on sounder ground if he had a moral, cultural, or religious argument to advance but he does not.
Directly after these points the philosopher does address Christian morality; he views 1 Cor. 14: 33-35 as a text relegating women to an inferior status to men or to be in submission. However, interpreting the passage is a complex and nuanced matter within Christian theology. While some may see it as advocating for the subordination of women, others offer alternative interpretations that promote equality and respect. Here are some ways Christian theologians address this question to value women:
Contextual Interpretation:
Historical context: Scholars argue that Paul's words were written to address specific issues within the Corinthian church, such as disruptive behavior during worship. They emphasize that the passage should not be applied universally without considering the historical and cultural context.
Focus on order and decorum: Some interpretations emphasize that Paul's primary concern was maintaining order and decorum during worship, not silencing women altogether. They argue that his instructions aimed to prevent disruptions and ensure a respectful atmosphere for prayer and prophecy.
Focus on Spiritual Gifts and Roles:
Affirmation of women's spiritual gifts: Many theologians point out that Paul elsewhere in his letters affirms women's spiritual gifts and leadership roles within the church (cf. Romans 16:1-2, Philippians 4:2-3). They argue that 1 Corinthians 14 should be interpreted in light of these broader affirmations.
Emphasis on mutual submission: Some interpretations highlight the call for mutual submission in the broader context of Christian community (cf. Ephesians 5:21). They argue that Paul's instructions in 1 Corinthians 14 should not be understood as one-sided subordination but as a call for mutual respect and submission within the context of worship.
Focus on spiritual equality: Some theologians emphasize the core message of Christian faith – that all believers, regardless of gender, are equally loved and valued by God. They argue that this fundamental principle should guide interpretations of all scripture, including potentially challenging passages like 1 Corinthians 14.
Fortunately for Trump, he is not the source of inequality, for that, according to the author, you need the move to agriculture (p. 114).
The author ascribes the mistaken notion that 45's support came from anti-immigrant hatred. Trump supporters though did not object to immigration but illegal invasion that no sovereign nation would tolerate.
There are a number of potential challenges that countries can face when dealing with large numbers of illegal immigrants. These include:
Economic strain: Illegal immigrants may place a strain on public resources, such as schools, hospitals, and social services. They may also compete with native-born, especially minority workers, for jobs, driving down wages.
Security concerns: Some illegal immigrants may be criminals, and their presence can increase crime rates. They may also be a security risk, as they may be more vulnerable to recruitment by terrorist groups.
By identifying the geographical origin of COVID, China, and calling the malady the "Chinese virus" (p.167), the author criticizes Trump. However, associating maladies with a geographical location is a long-standing practice: Spanish Flu (1918), West Nile Virus (1999): This virus was first isolated in the West Nile region of Uganda in 1937, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) (2012): This coronavirus was first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012, Zika Virus (2015): This virus was first identified in the Zika Forest in Uganda in 1947, Ebola Virus (1976): This virus was first identified in Yambuku, Zaire (now Democratic Republic of the Congo) in 1976, Lyme Disease (1975): This tick-borne disease was first identified in Lyme, Connecticut, in 1975, and the Chagas Disease (1909): This parasitic disease was first identified in Carlos Chagas, Brazil, in 1909. Since COVID arose in Wuhan, China, in fact more evidence has come to light identifying the origin of the plague in the city.
The author both criticizes Trump's supporters as both comparatively uneducated but laments their relative lack of education. They are the forgotten people that elites in both parties have neglected for decades who saw 45 as their champion. That support would be democracy in action.
There is no logic here but the author ties 45's judicial appointments to American slavery. Most societies, in some form, likely had elements of forced labor or control systems resembling slavery in 1776. This includes regions of Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas. Large-scale chattel slavery, often with racialized elements, was prevalent in European colonies in the Americas, some parts of Africa, and some Middle Eastern Muslim empires. Slavery was a widespread and deeply ingrained practice in various forms across the globe in 1776. Understanding the complexities and nuances of these diverse systems is crucial for a comprehensive historical understanding. Today, the International Labour Organization estimates that 40.3 million people are in modern slavery today, including 24.9 million in forced labor and 15.4 million in forced marriage. The point of rampant slavery today seems lost on the author's tome about hatred.
The author claims that systemic racism led to the Black Lives Matter movement but BLM's framework is influenced by Critical Race Theory (CRT), which itself has Marxist roots in analyzing systemic oppression based on class and power structures. Critics point to aspects of CRT, like institutional racism and structural inequalities, echoing Marxist concepts of class struggle and societal critique. The author's bias can not account for Mark Fisher, co-founder of Black Lives Matter Rhode Island and founder of BLM Incorporated, who has stated that he "personally" liked Trump before bashing Joe Biden as a "deep disappointment."
I think the book has to be taken with a grain of salt and is more simply reflective of an elite view of deplorables.
On agriculture, there are a number of academics who offer critiques of the practice. Here are some current scholars who offer critical perspectives on the rise of agriculture and its implications:
1. James C. Scott: Known for his book "Against the Grain," Scott argues that the transition from hunter-gatherer societies to agriculture was not necessarily voluntary but often driven by social pressures and coercion. He highlights the potential loss of autonomy and increased inequality associated with the rise of complex civilizations dependent on large-scale farming.
2. Jared Diamond: In "Guns, Germs, and Steel," Diamond analyzes why some societies thrived after adopting agriculture while others did not. He argues that agriculture, while enabling population growth and technological advancements, also increased vulnerability to disease, warfare, and environmental degradation.
3. Vandana Shiva: A prominent ecofeminist scholar, Shiva criticizes the industrialization of agriculture and its negative impacts on biodiversity, soil health, and small-scale farmers. She advocates for sustainable farming practices based on ecological principles and traditional knowledge.
4. David Graeber and David Wengrow: In "The Dawn of Everything," Graeber and Wengrow challenge the traditional narrative that agriculture led directly to cities and social hierarchies. They argue that early civilizations often existed before large-scale farming and that cooperation and mutual aid played a significant role in social organization.
5. Charles C. Mann: Author of "1493: Uncovering the New World Columbus Created," Mann explores the devastating consequences of European colonization and the introduction of agriculture and invasive species on indigenous populations in the Americas. His work highlights the interconnectedness of environmental exploitation and social injustice.
It's important to note that these scholars offer diverse perspectives and don't necessarily share a unified critique of agriculture. Some emphasize its limitations, while others acknowledge its potential benefits while calling for more sustainable and equitable practices.
An easy target for the author is Donald Trump, to wit, his active libido and physical attraction to women while wanting to bed them down is described as a prejudice against women (pp. 109, 111, 112). If that is the case, then evolutionary biology would be quite different from how we view it currently.
Sexual selection is a mode of natural selection in which members of one biological sex choose mates of the other sex to mate with (intersexual selection), and compete with members of the same sex for access to members of the opposite sex (intrasexual selection). The author delights in the fact that Trump failed in one attempt of sexual conquest but some individuals have greater reproductive success than others within a population, for example because they are more attractive or prefer more attractive partners to produce offspring. Successful males benefit from frequent mating and monopolizing access to one or more fertile females. Females in turn can maximize the return on the energy they invest in reproduction by selecting and mating with the best males. The author would be on sounder ground if he had a moral, cultural, or religious argument to advance but he does not.
Directly after these points the philosopher does address Christian morality; he views 1 Cor. 14: 33-35 as a text relegating women to an inferior status to men or to be in submission. However, interpreting the passage is a complex and nuanced matter within Christian theology. While some may see it as advocating for the subordination of women, others offer alternative interpretations that promote equality and respect. Here are some ways Christian theologians address this question to value women:
Contextual Interpretation:
Historical context: Scholars argue that Paul's words were written to address specific issues within the Corinthian church, such as disruptive behavior during worship. They emphasize that the passage should not be applied universally without considering the historical and cultural context.
Focus on order and decorum: Some interpretations emphasize that Paul's primary concern was maintaining order and decorum during worship, not silencing women altogether. They argue that his instructions aimed to prevent disruptions and ensure a respectful atmosphere for prayer and prophecy.
Focus on Spiritual Gifts and Roles:
Affirmation of women's spiritual gifts: Many theologians point out that Paul elsewhere in his letters affirms women's spiritual gifts and leadership roles within the church (cf. Romans 16:1-2, Philippians 4:2-3). They argue that 1 Corinthians 14 should be interpreted in light of these broader affirmations.
Emphasis on mutual submission: Some interpretations highlight the call for mutual submission in the broader context of Christian community (cf. Ephesians 5:21). They argue that Paul's instructions in 1 Corinthians 14 should not be understood as one-sided subordination but as a call for mutual respect and submission within the context of worship.
Focus on spiritual equality: Some theologians emphasize the core message of Christian faith – that all believers, regardless of gender, are equally loved and valued by God. They argue that this fundamental principle should guide interpretations of all scripture, including potentially challenging passages like 1 Corinthians 14.
Fortunately for Trump, he is not the source of inequality, for that, according to the author, you need the move to agriculture (p. 114).
The author ascribes the mistaken notion that 45's support came from anti-immigrant hatred. Trump supporters though did not object to immigration but illegal invasion that no sovereign nation would tolerate.
There are a number of potential challenges that countries can face when dealing with large numbers of illegal immigrants. These include:
Economic strain: Illegal immigrants may place a strain on public resources, such as schools, hospitals, and social services. They may also compete with native-born, especially minority workers, for jobs, driving down wages.
Security concerns: Some illegal immigrants may be criminals, and their presence can increase crime rates. They may also be a security risk, as they may be more vulnerable to recruitment by terrorist groups.
By identifying the geographical origin of COVID, China, and calling the malady the "Chinese virus" (p.167), the author criticizes Trump. However, associating maladies with a geographical location is a long-standing practice: Spanish Flu (1918), West Nile Virus (1999): This virus was first isolated in the West Nile region of Uganda in 1937, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) (2012): This coronavirus was first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012, Zika Virus (2015): This virus was first identified in the Zika Forest in Uganda in 1947, Ebola Virus (1976): This virus was first identified in Yambuku, Zaire (now Democratic Republic of the Congo) in 1976, Lyme Disease (1975): This tick-borne disease was first identified in Lyme, Connecticut, in 1975, and the Chagas Disease (1909): This parasitic disease was first identified in Carlos Chagas, Brazil, in 1909. Since COVID arose in Wuhan, China, in fact more evidence has come to light identifying the origin of the plague in the city.
The author both criticizes Trump's supporters as both comparatively uneducated but laments their relative lack of education. They are the forgotten people that elites in both parties have neglected for decades who saw 45 as their champion. That support would be democracy in action.
There is no logic here but the author ties 45's judicial appointments to American slavery. Most societies, in some form, likely had elements of forced labor or control systems resembling slavery in 1776. This includes regions of Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas. Large-scale chattel slavery, often with racialized elements, was prevalent in European colonies in the Americas, some parts of Africa, and some Middle Eastern Muslim empires. Slavery was a widespread and deeply ingrained practice in various forms across the globe in 1776. Understanding the complexities and nuances of these diverse systems is crucial for a comprehensive historical understanding. Today, the International Labour Organization estimates that 40.3 million people are in modern slavery today, including 24.9 million in forced labor and 15.4 million in forced marriage. The point of rampant slavery today seems lost on the author's tome about hatred.
The author claims that systemic racism led to the Black Lives Matter movement but BLM's framework is influenced by Critical Race Theory (CRT), which itself has Marxist roots in analyzing systemic oppression based on class and power structures. Critics point to aspects of CRT, like institutional racism and structural inequalities, echoing Marxist concepts of class struggle and societal critique. The author's bias can not account for Mark Fisher, co-founder of Black Lives Matter Rhode Island and founder of BLM Incorporated, who has stated that he "personally" liked Trump before bashing Joe Biden as a "deep disappointment."
I think the book has to be taken with a grain of salt and is more simply reflective of an elite view of deplorables.
August 25, 2025
Incrível a capacidade do autor de abordar a psique humana em vários pontos de vista, desde a biologia até classes sociais, política e gênero. Ótimo para quem se interessa pela forma que pensamos e agimos.
January 1, 2024
Certainly not easy reading, but essential in getting even the slightest understanding of why we as humans seem so determined to undermine our own best interests and creations.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews