Constrained Vision Essay PDF

Preview

Summary

essay arguing that the constrained vision is a better way of viewing the world than the unconstrained...

Description

Zahra Thiam POLS 1150: Prosperity September 19, 2019 The Biological Basis of the Constrained Vision A vision is a visceral feeling that one might have about reality and human nature. Every human being is different, making a vision a subjective view of the world and how it functions. Although visions often take form before the use of empirical evidence to validate them, they are necessary for filling in gaps in individual knowledge when reality becomes too complex to fully understand. The intuitive nature of visions leads individuals to have them before they form opinions. Therefore, visions are often used to inform opinions about the surrounding world. In A Conflict of Visions by Thomas Sowell, Sowell defines two types of visions. The dichotomy between these two visions, the constrained and unconstrained, rests on their respective view of the nature of man, the effectiveness of trade-offs, and whether the process or the desired result itself is of greater importance. In the constrained vision, man’s selfishness, impulsiveness, and egocentricity, in summary, make him morally limited. Despite the fact that it is not human nature to put the needs of others in society ahead of one’s own, human nature does not need to be changed because artificially derived social benefits can work within its constraints to increase the welfare of society as a whole. In the unconstrained vision, humans have an underlying potential to act morally and benefit society. The institutions and regulations we currently have that are supposed to control vice actually work to promote it. Human nature is not fixed, but highly malleable and it is because of this that these artificial institutions should be removed. The constrained vision relies heavily on the process of making society a better place. This process does not consist of taking apart our entire current system, but fixing it with tradeoffs. The unconstrained vision argues that motivating individuals to do better and be better is more important and more effective than incentives. These institutions should be removed to allow human nature to exist naturally. The constrained vision provides a more accurate lense through which we should view the world because it is supported by the physiological basis of behavior. Our struggle to survive and inherent goal of reproduction explains the constraints of human nature that are beyond our control. If you were to strip away the institutions and social norms or customs we have in society today, you would be left with nothing but the biological basis of life.The biological basis of human life is centered around procreation and passing down favorable genes to future generations. Procreation is such a natural, bodily instinct that even those who decide they do not want to have children - almost always a choice influenced by perceived social constraints - desire sex and its inherent intimacy. While these individuals’ minds are set on not reproducing, their bodies’ urge to nevertheless take part in the act is evidence that reproduction is in our nature despite the aspects of society that have convinced us that we do not need or want it. It follows that it is in human nature to engage in acts of self-preservation and prioritize individual gain over that of others so that we can successfully procreate. Acts of self-preservation and the prioritizing of individual gain, which translate into egocentric and selfish attitudes, are key elements in fulfilling the biological duty of reproduction.

We also live in a society where scarcity, the fact that you cannot have everything that you want exactly when you want it, is the basis of any and all conflict. Nothing that we find desirable, whether it be a job in a particular field or a certain income level, is obtained purely by wanting it, which makes competition inherent. While greed may lead one to desire more from society than is necessary for basic reproduction, it follows that humans are inclined to first think of themselves in order to achieve this biological goal. The traits that the constrained vision sees as inherent in all humans are mechanisms necessary for achieving a goal that goes beyond social construct and human intention. The selfish nature of humans is fixed because the underlying goal of procreation is an organic and intrinsic part of who we are. Prudence, the careful weighing of trade-offs, is essential in the constrained vision. To protect man from one another, each individual must carefully consider the trade-offs that are part of contrived incentives and decide what best serves our ultimate goal. The argument of the constrained vision is therefore an accurate lense through which we should see the world. Adam Smith argues that “to make the European feel poignantly the full pain of those who suffered in China” is “perfectly useless”.1 It would make no sense for man living on one continent to feel the misery of man living on another continent thousands of miles away. The distress of those who have not directly suffered would significantly lower their quality of life and affect their productivity with absolutely no benefit to those who suffered directly. To Smith, man’s ability to compartmentalize is a beneficial moral limitation.2 To further this argument, it could be said that this commonly shared trait is not just a moral limitation, but a cognitive one as well. In the example of the European and the Chinese, the European does not carry on with their life after hearing devastating news from around the world because their primary intention is to disregard the affliction of the Chinese. The human mind may be limited in its ability to fully empathize with people with whom they feel no immediate kinship and who lead lives so unrelated to their own. This egocentricity is not intentional, but outside of the cognitive abilities of man. So when the constrained vision holds that trade-offs must be institutionalized so that society can exist within the constraints of man, it is because man is constrained by these characteristics of human nature. Smith’s argument concerning the limitations of man is connected to our innate urge to prime our environment for procreation. In nature, the process of attracting and then securing a mate for sexual reproduction requires a significant amount of energy as it is. It is not feasible to take on the burdens of others while also managing the obstacles to our long-term goals of survival and reproduction. Believers in the unconstrained vision argue that it is human nature to be moral, caring, and conscious of the needs of others. They believe that humans are born this way and it is society that corrupts our actions. Studies done on preverbal 18 month old infants show that they are almost always willing to help an adult, familiar or stranger, who is clearly struggling to complete a task without being asked to do so. More often than not, if the adult in the room were to accidentally drop an object or struggle to pick up said object, the infant would pick it up and hand it to them.3 At first glance, this may seem like evidence that because the most undeveloped minds, like the ones found in preverbal infants, are naturally inclined to help others, even 1 Sowell, Thomas. A Conflict of Visions. 2nd ed., Basic Books, 2006, p.17. 2 Sowell, Thomas. A Conflict of Visions. 2nd ed., Basic Books, 2006. p.17.. 3 Warneken, Felix, and Michael Tomasello. “Altruistic Helping in Human Infants and Young Chimpanzees.” Science (New York, N.Y.), U.S. National Library of Medicine, 3 Mar. 2006, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16513986

strangers, human beings must be born moral. If you look more closely at the root cause of these altruistic actions, the constrained vision prevails. In nature, life is not only about mating and reproduction, but about raising offspring until they are mature enough to fend for themselves. Although this may occur in various different ways, this is the case for virtually every sexually reproducing animal on Earth. Human infants, particularly preverbal ones, are entirely dependent on their caregiver for survival. It is in their nature to rely on adult figures as this dependency is crucial to their survival and the extent to which they do varies based on the familiarity of the adult. While it may seem innately altruistic of them to always help an adult that appears to be struggling to complete a task, these actions can always be traced back to selfish motives that prioritize survival and personal advancement. Both adults and infants stand to gain from assisting someone that they in general depend on and who they often seek assistance from themselves. In Adam Smith’s writing, the European man is more inclined to help and seek the benefit of those in his continent, country, or city, because that will have more direct, positive repercussions on his own life. Trying to help anyone who resides farther than the boundaries of his own continent would be working beyond the limits of his cognitive and moral abilities and would result in his own misery. Another study has shown that children between the ages of 3 and 5 year old tend to give a greater share of a reward to those who have worked visibly harder to complete a task, even if it means they get to keep less for themselves. While the results of the study showed that merit influenced how the children distributed rewards, it was also clear that they were operating under a self-serving bias.4 The children tended to keep more than half of the rewards for themselves when they worked harder, but rarely deviated from an equal share of rewards when they had worked less than their partner.5 At this age, children have now been socialized with others their age in controlled settings such as classrooms. In these settings, societal values such as equity and rules that apply to everyone play a more constant part in their lives. They are taught that in life they will be held to the same standards as their peers and that they should treat others the way they want to be treated. If the rules that apply to their peers will apply to them as well, they would rather those rules be agreeable. A child that age can simulate the feeling of getting rewarded for working harder enough that they are willing to concede more rewards when they work less. The ideas of the unconstrained vision will lead back to the principles of the constrained view. All moral, magnanimous behavior can be traced back to who we are helping and how that will help us or make us feel. Why do we prioritize helping our loved ones over those we do not know? It is because benefitting someone we have a relationship with has a direct impact on our personal well-being whereas the welfare of an individual we have no emotional ties to does not. It is important to note, however, that this selfishness is not necessarily immoral or bad. As a society we have learned to associate the continuous improvement of our welfare with negative connotations. Prioritizing personal happiness can be positive, especially if it requires helping others to feel better about ourselves. That is not to say that everything that humans do to feel good will always have a positive effect on society as a whole. The human mind is not capable of quantifying the ramifications of each individual action. This limitation is why the constrained vision calls for social order and institutions to place a check on the choices that do not help 4 Kanngiesser, Patricia, and Felix Warneken. “Young Children Consider Merit When Sharing Resources with Others.” PloS One, Public Library of Science, 2012, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3430625/

5 Ibid

everyone....