I have recently started re-watching one of my favorite television series, Battlestar Galactica (2003-2009). Some reasons I enjoy this sci-fi story are that it is told as future-history (i.e., an imaginary, technologically advanced civilization that rises and falls in the distant past relative to our own time); it is post-apocalyptic; it deals with potential problems around AI; and it includes a fascinating religious tension throughout the seasons between the monotheistic religion of the Cylons and the polytheistic one of the humans. The underlying reason I enjoy Battlestar Galactica so much is that it wrestles with the question, “What does it mean to be human?”
In a speech he gives near the start of the story, Commander Adama is reflecting on the history of humanity’s fight for survival when threatened with extinction by the revolt of its AI creation, the Cylons. He puts this question to his audience, “Why are we, as a people, worth saving?”
I have been mulling over the same question. While the effects of global climate change increase and go largely unaddressed; while the re-play of some of history’s epic civilizational tragedies through the advancement of nationalistic and exclusionary priorities and policies proceeds apace in many countries around the globe; while people engage in violence through hateful and demeaning speech with one another online (not to mention all-too-often actual, physical violence); while the effects of consumerism and rampant technological progress erode our humanity in ways we cannot yet fully appreciate; while so much seems to be going wrong, why are we, as a people, worth saving?
It depends, at least in-part, on answering such other questions as, What does it mean to be human? What does it mean to have worth? What would “salvation” be like? There are biological, ethical, spiritual, economic, and social answers to all of those questions. In this article, I would like to briefly consider “What is the nature of humanity?” as a step down the path toward answering Commander Adama’s question.
In the West, our thinking on this question will always be affected (whether we like it, or even realize it, or not) by the writings of St. Augustine and the historic Christian dogma of original sin. Proponents of this dogma teach that while human nature is created good, it has been irreparably corrupted by evil such that it is no longer capable of true goodness. How this corruption is passed down through every generation of humanity is a matter of some debate, but most proponents of original sin have historically agreed that humanity’s only hope is for a supernatural remedy to this fallen human condition. (Any merely natural remedy would, of course, be subject to the same corruption needing to be remedied in the first place.)
Such a dim view of human nature is not limited to Christianity. Human behavior and its effects on fellow-humans and the environment alone can be enough to engender bitter hatred in any observer who chooses to focus only on the negative.
From a Spiritual Naturalist perspective, another story is possible. What if human beings are born with a clean slate and we grow in goodness or badness based on our desires, our choices, our conditioning, and our experiences. In other words, our individual, and consequently, our collective goodness and badness, as a people, is determined by both our behaviors and our environment.(1)
I have met many people whose beliefs about human nature are sweepingly general. I used to be one such person, myself. Either all human beings from the dawn of time down through the present day are good, or they are all selfish and evil. My actual experience as a human being and my observation of other humans is that we are an achingly complex mixture of both adaptive and mal-adaptive motivations and movements, thoughts and feelings, actions and re-actions. Are people good? Yes. Are we also bad? Yes. The precise mixture in each person remains a mystery. The reasons why are myriad and are deeply embedded in an individual’s unique experience of being human.
In all this crazy mixed-upedness involved in being human, are we, as a people, worth saving? Is it worth doing what we can to reverse the human causes of climate change? Is it worth mobilizing our votes and voices to prioritize humane, democratic values in civil society? Is it worth choosing silence in response to violent speech or to respond instead with words of peace? Is it worth practicing mindfulness around our use of technology and our engagement in consumer commerce? Is it worth choosing love over hate?
Several years ago, I made a choice. Instead of viewing myself and other people as basically selfish and prone to evil, I chose to practice viewing humans as if we all—in Aldous Huxley’s terms—“were essentially sane and naturally good.”(2) Is that view universally verifiable? Of course not. Nevertheless, this perspective has made a world of difference in my own actual experience of being human, in how I see the world, in how I relate to other people, and in how I answer the question, “Are we, as a people, worth saving?”
As you may by now suspect, my answer to the question is “yes.” Why? Because of love. Now, I’m not going all ooey-gooey on you. This is very practical. Like the Dalai Lama when he talks about receiving our first lesson in universal compassion embraced in our mother’s arms drinking the milk from her breast. Such love is the most natural thing in the world and is observable across many species throughout nature.
I recently encountered the following theory by philosopher Jimmy Alfonso Licon about the evolutionary development of love as a survival tool:
Parasites, by constantly probing the defenses of their hosts, force those hosts to innovate. Over time, the traits that resist exploitation survive—and so do the social systems that support those traits. The machinery of love may have been one of those systems.
This lens does not strip love of its emotional or moral significance. If love emerged under pressure—if it is nature’s response to nature’s own threats—then it is all the more remarkable. Love is neither a luxury nor an accident. It is a hard-won achievement. A stabilizing force in a world built on contingency and risk. * * *
Love, then, is not the pristine ideal it is often portrayed to be. Nor is it illusory. It is instead a practical strategy with beautiful side effects. Love is perhaps one of nature’s best answers to one of nature’s worst questions.(3)
Isn’t that cool? If that theory is even plausible, then we can experiment by practicing love to see if it can save us from other things besides parasites too. What does this mean in the day-to-day? It means be choosy about what you give your attention to. William James wrote, “My experience is what I agree to attend to.”(4) If I attend only to eating chocolate ice cream sundaes, I will get a stomach ache. If I attend only to the aches and pains in my body, I will feel bad most of the time. If I am a dedicated doom scroller, I will also feel bad about myself, other people, and the world. By choosing what we attend to we curate a personal sense of reality that determines our experience and affects our sense of well-being.
I choose to attend to love. In my lived experience the practice of love—however small—increases the effects of love. Some practical ways to practice this are: Be kind. Don’t be afraid. Assume the best in yourself and others. Turn off the news. Honor humane values such as integrity, ethical behavior, peacemaking, and equality. Help people on the margins. Look for where love is happening. Celebrate it and trust that it makes a difference for good no matter how big or how small it may seem.
One of my life-laboratories and a place where I celebrate love every day is at the bedsides of the people I support in hospice care. I get to witness, listen to the stories, and be with people from across all imaginable diversities: ethnic, religious, education, class, gender, and sexual orientation. Some of them I might be friends with in regular life. Others, I probably wouldn’t be. Real love also practices strong, healthy boundaries.
As with times of birth, when someone is dying, out comes the love — from spouses, children, parents, siblings, ex’es, friends, and co-workers. When someone is about to leave they need to tell others they love them and the others need to tell the one leaving that they are loved too.(5) Many people would be surprised at how little politics, religion, or how much money you may have accumulated matters at such a time.
What makes humanity worth saving to you? If you want to answer, let your own sense of well-being be your guide. Do you like how you feel when you are angry, hateful, and trying to make someone else pay? Compare that with how you feel when you “live and let live” or choose to “let it be” instead.
Humanity may survive our present circumstances and the near-future consequences of our actions up till now. And we may not survive. While we are here, my answer to the question, “Are we, as a people, worth saving?” is an unequivocal “yes.” Because of love.
__________
Learn about Membership in the Spiritual Naturalist Society
The Spiritual Naturalist Society works to spread awareness of spiritual naturalism as a way of life, develop its thought and practice, and help bring together like-minded practitioners in fellowship.
SNS strives to include diverse voices within the spectrum of naturalistic spirituality. Authors will vary in their opinions, terms, and outlook. The views of no single author therefore necessarily reflect those of all Spiritual Naturalists or of SNS.
__________
Notes:
- By behaviors, I mean both outward actions and such inward behaviors as desires, thoughts, and feelings (both conscious and unconscious).
- Aldous Huxley, Island, New York:Harper Perennial (2009), available at, https://a.co/d/8nnjfNi.
- Jimmy Alfonso Licon, Hearts on the Run (or How Parasites Gave Us Love), online at, https://thehumanist.com/commentary/hearts-on-the-run-or-how-parasites-gave-us-love.
- William James, The Principles of Psychology, Vol. 1, New York:Cosimo Classics (2013), available at, https://a.co/d/1Rm9msv.
- Palliative care physician, Dr. Ira Byock has identified four phrases that most people need to say and to hear before we die. The phrases are: “Please forgive me,” “I forgive you,” “Thank you,” and “I love you.” See, Ira Byock, M.D., The Four Things that Matter Most, online at, https://irabyock.org/books/the-four-things-that-matter-most/.
Note: discussion is moderated and comments require approval; this may take some time.