Why is the phrase as popular as it is?
On another note, I also don’t quite understand what it means or implies. When someone doesn’t have faith in humanity, what does that mean?
Also, what is the humanity in the phrase? Do they mean all 8 billion people? Or is humanity understood here as something metaphysical?
I don’t know about its origin, but as far as I understand people using the phrase, I think they just mean the potential for someone to do good regardless of the circumstances or consequences.
Faith in the character of every human to do good and achieve things.
Not metaphysical.
If you don’t have faith in humanity, it means you are cynical and you expect humans to take advantage of situations and act selfishly.
Or you could have the realist approach that while people are capable of altruism and selfless acts, capable of thinking of others and placing them before themselves…
…they are nearly always still tethered to real needs for their own continued survival, the method of their attempts at altruism at often misguided due to ignorance of the total situation, most people are bound by social norms and customs, or ideologies of some kind that often justify overlooking some tragedies and actually perpetuating others, people also generally despise serious sacrifice toward a more indirect and necessary good thing, or a direct and obvious good thing that requires immense sacrifice…
…Etc.
People are complex, you can verify that with psychology, sociology, political science, etc.
Humans, individually and as assembled in various groups, have often stood by and done nothing as crimes and atrocities have occured, and of course those committing those crimes and atrocities are other humana.
A realist has no faith in humanity to do the right thing.
A realist has faith that humans will continue to be human.
Has nothing to do with OPs question or my answer, but to address a single tangent you’ve offered, yes, people are complex.
OP asked what it means to not have faith in humanity, and the person who responded to your comment had a nuanced take on the answer. Is that really a tangent?
(btw your top comment is a very good answer)
Much simpler than my explanation: Are you cynical or optimistic about humanity’s moral nature?
I think humans are largely wired similarly and it’s mostly nurture that influences one’s “moral” compass.
I don’t think our morality is evolving in any meaningful way, but I am optimistic about our ethical development as a direct result of our increasing interconnectedness via travel technology and more significantly, social media/online news.
The invasion of Ukraine, for instance, is inciting a much stronger public global reaction than international conflicts historically have and I believe even twenty years ago(or less; Crimea), nobody would have cared that some faraway place was fighting another faraway place.
I think humanity and humans individually are developing empathy past our preoccupation with the monoculture we’re born into as a direct result of physical and digital proximity. Understanding and believing that we, all humans, humanity, are all related and connected is much more difficult to ignore or discount via ignorance these days, leading to a further-reaching awareness and empathy for situations distance may otherwise have preempted.
Haha while I agree with you on a lot of what you said, I was more restating your response than asking you personally. But I do enjoy the insight.
I think empathy is the only way we can survive. Intelligence got us here, but it won’t keep us here. If we want to survive, I think we need to use empathy to temper our ambitions. Otherwise, the people in charge will end up ruling over a smoking mountain of shit.
Also, it was asked 6 (7?) days ago. Maybe your client has a delay of some kind? At least that’s how it looks on my end. I’m using Boost if that means anything.
By the way, did you ask this 6 days ago, because I just received a notification this morning?