Book SummaryHumankind, by Rutger Bregman

1-Page Summary1-Page Book Summary of Humankind

What lies at the core of human nature? If you stripped away civilization’s laws and norms, would we be fundamentally compassionate creatures? Or would we cheat, lie, and steal, with only self-interest in mind? In Humankind, historian Rutger Bregman argues that humans are fundamentally good. Using scientific studies from archaeology and psychology, he claims that our species evolved to be friendly and compassionate. When we do evil things, he maintains, it’s not because we’re evil by nature, but for a variety of other reasons, including our desire to conform and to act for the greater good.

Bregman suggests that this idea—that human nature is good, not evil—has important implications for our world. When we see people as fundamentally generous and kind, we’re more likely to form meaningful relationships, help strangers, and fight against injustice. According to Bregman, these actions lay the foundation for a more trusting and peaceful society.

This guide consists of three...

Humankind Summary The Debate: Are Humans Good or Evil?

For millennia, Bregman explains, philosophers have debated humankind’s true nature. Are we born good and corrupted by civilization? Or does civilization correct and curb our inherently evil nature? According to Bregman, there are two philosophers in particular who’ve shaped this debate: Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Hobbes believed that humans are inherently selfish and cruel, whereas Rousseau maintained that we’re fundamentally decent and want to do the right thing.

(Shortform note: As Bregman notes, Hobbes and Rousseau most famously articulated the two sides of the human nature debate in Western philosophy. But other philosophical traditions have similar debates. For example, in Chinese philosophy, the philosopher Mencius (372 to 289 BCE) made a similar argument as Rousseau, maintaining that we're inherently good. On the other side of the debate is the philosopher Xunzi (310 to unknown BCE), who, like Hobbes, argued that we're fundamentally selfish and that our inherent tendencies lead to anarchy.)

Bregman suggests that the debate between Hobbes and Rousseau is far from resolved. Many of our current social and political debates stem...

Humankind Summary Evolutionary Evidence: We Evolved to Work Together

To answer the question of whether humans are fundamentally good or evil, Bregman goes back to the beginning of our species. He explains that our ancestors were nomadic foragers who traveled from place to place, hunting animals and gathering food.

(Shortform note: While Bregman is correct that many of our early human ancestors were foragers, this wasn’t always the case. Evidence suggests that early humans only began to hunt animals and forage plants about 2 million years ago. Before that, our ancestors scavenged meat from animals that other predators had already killed.)

Based on archaeological evidence, Bregman concludes that these early foragers were compassionate and cooperative. He argues that, contrary to popular belief, they didn't engage in war with each other. In fact, he maintains that humans’ ability to cooperate is the primary reason that our species has survived. Let’s discuss these claims in more detail.

Early Human Foragers Avoided War

According to Bregman, early human foraging groups lived peacefully with each other for millions of years. These groups struggled to survive in the face of...

Humankind Summary Historical Evidence: Civilization Causes Suffering

As we’ve discussed, evidence suggests that our early foraging ancestors worked together and avoided war. However, Bregman argues that this peaceful coexistence between human tribes began to change about 15,000 years ago, when the last Ice Age ended. Tempted by the abundance of grain and other foods, humans began to settle down in villages, which eventually became cities and civilizations.

(Shortform note: Many researchers agree with Bregman that our ancestors settled down in villages because of an abundance of food. However, some historians have offered alternative explanations. For example, an archaeologist from Stanford University theorizes that foragers began to settle down not because of food, but because they valued spiritual and artistic communal practices. He claims that settlements brought people together, allowing them to create art and engage in spiritual rituals.)

Like Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Bregman maintains that humans’ transition from foraging to civilization created societies that were more violent, less equitable, and less healthy. Let’s take a closer look at the negative effects...

Humankind Summary Modern Evidence: Evil Doesn’t Come Naturally to Us

As we’ve seen, Bregman claims that humans have evolved to be compassionate and cooperative. We survived by learning from each other and working together. We began to engage in war and violence not because it’s in our nature, but because the invention of settlements and civilization created more violent conditions.

However, all of the information that we’ve reviewed so far goes back thousands of years. What does more recent evidence tell us about our true nature? Bregman suggests that modern scientific evidence offers a similar conclusion: that humans are fundamentally good and want to do the right thing.

In this section, we’ll discuss two modern scenarios that many people assume to bring out the cruelest, most selfish impulses in human nature: the prisoner-guard relationship and war. Bregman argues that while these situations can be brutal, humanity’s fundamental goodness shows through in each of them.

Let’s discuss each of these scenarios in more detail.

Prisoners and Guards: Being a Guard Doesn't Necessarily Lead to Cruelty

According to Bregman, proponents of Hobbes’s point of view—that humans are inherently selfish and cruel—often use the prisoner-guard relationship...

Humankind Summary Why Do We Commit Evil Actions?

While Bregman maintains that evil doesn't come naturally to us, he also acknowledges that humans have done terrible things to each other. Soldiers may not enjoy killing, but many do it anyway. The guards in the Stanford Prison Experiment might have been following orders, but they still went along with Zimbardo’s instructions. Moreover, throughout history, humans have enslaved each other, fought brutal wars, and committed genocide.

So, if we’re not programmed for violence, then why have we done such terrible things? According to Bregman, we commit evil actions for several reasons:

Reason #1: We Look Out for Our Own Group

Bregman suggests that we commit evil due to our tendency to protect the people in our immediate circle at the cost of others. Biologically, this desire to look out for our own group is due to our high levels of the hormone [restricted term], which regulates love. In most cases, this is a positive thing: It allows us to learn from one another and develop relationships.

However, our high levels of [restricted term] have a downside. According to Bregman, research suggests [restricted term] only enhances connection to people who are familiar to us—people...

Humankind Summary Seeing Humans as Fundamentally Good Can Create a Better World

In the previous two sections, we discussed Bregman’s argument that humans are inherently good, not evil. But why does it matter if we see humans as good or evil? In this section, we’ll discuss why Bregman believes having a more positive outlook on humanity can create positive change in our society.

Our View of Humanity Creates a Feedback Loop

Bregman argues that whichever view of humanity we choose—Hobbes or Rousseau, evil or good—creates a feedback loop. In other words, we get what we expect from people. Research suggests that expectations have a significant impact on behavior. For example, if a parent consistently tells their child that the child is unathletic, then the child will start to believe it. She might avoid playing sports with other children. If she does play, she’ll see every failure as proof that she’s unathletic, instead of as an opportunity to improve. She therefore enters a negative feedback loop.

According to Bregman, the same is true of how we see humans. If we expect people to be selfish, they’ll act selfishly. However, the opposite holds as well: If we see humans as fundamentally decent creatures, **we’ll treat each other with respect, trust, and...

Shortform Exercise: Use Positive Feedback Loops in Your Own Life

Bregman claims that having a more optimistic outlook on human nature can create positive change in our society. In this exercise, we’ll explore how you can use the power of expectations to improve your own relationships.

Think of a person who you don’t always get along with—it might be a coworker, friend, or family member. How would you describe your relationship to that person? What specifically do they do that annoys you?