There is a conjecture in philosophy that states that the civilized state of man is full of suffering and inequality and that the state of nature of man is one in which man only has desires of self-preservation and perfectibility, and that somewhere in between the natural state and the civilized state there lies a pastoral and sedentary state in which humanity’s peace is at its strongest and suffering is at a minimum. Therefore, society is bad because the rich man and the poor man are born, and to efface that humanity must go back to a simpler state where we are natural and equal. In other words, inequality is unnatural. Such is the the reasoning of Jean Jacques Rousseau.
This reasoning, however, is only half true. Yes it is true that society creates social inequalities, but inequality is not dependent on society. In other words, in the state of nature, there is natural inequality as well. No two people occupy the same life and many factors contribute to the ability and actuality of a person either being above or below another person. Rousseau also says that man naturally wants to preserve himself, expand the population, and has an idiosyncratic perception and knowledge of the world that is compared to none. From the basics, humans developed language, ideas, comparisons, self-consciousness, and reflection (among others). With these abilities together, man joined together in tribes, and then societies, to collaborate and build a social structure. By nature, we are social, and consequently society was natural because there was a combination of intelligence and interactions to tie it together. Therefore, social inequality is not unnatural as is assumed by Rousseau because as societies form, they become more complex like the human mind, and evidently, where there is space for goodness and equality, there is also room for badness and inequality. Nature is never always kind nor cruel, but both, and we as humans have an innate correlation to that. Rousseau draws a distinction between the two sides, but we must understand that equality and inequality are inevitable and
coexist as part of one. Yet, there is an element of human nature that makes itself unique. We want to break free from this polarity. There is the desire to fight for equality and claim inequality as the cause for the suffering of many dingy lives. We, above all, care heavily on the problem of inequality because we have great expectations. We have beliefs and hopes and are nothing short of unique. However, I must illuminate and divert to a specific example to show how, however unnatural things may seem, so to say however much they deviate from Rousseau’s concept of naturality and equality, society and inequality are of the most natural essence. How so? We must look at the little things, because they help paint the bigger picture.
I talk about Formicidae, or what are known as ants. However minuscule the species may fare to humans, their existence is inherently beneficial in comprehending the nature of life and of inequality.
An ant colony refers to “the typical ant nest—a vertical tunnel [6-25 feet deep] with horizontal chambers” along with its eusocial inhabitants and functions (Humphreys, McClintock). The ant colony resembles a human society in many aspects including hierarchy, number structure, and responsibilities for survival. At the top of the hierarchy there is a queen or egg-laying ant that lays thousands of eggs either sexually or asexually. Typically the former poses as the primary process for most ant species, where drones are involved. According to the extermination specialists at Terminix, “drones are male ants whose only function is to mate with the queen so she can lay her eggs” (Terminix). Besides these ants, which are almost always inside the ant nest, there are alates, or winged reproductive ants, that partake in nuptial flights to reproduce with ants of other colonies. At the bottom of the social order is the most abundant type of ant which is the worker ant. All worker ants are female and are born into this position. — To elaborate, ant larvae are fed different amounts of food and some obtain better nutrition than others. Of those that survive, the strongest are usually the ants that will have the ability to lay eggs and become queens or alates, while the rest turn out to be worker ants. Therefore, the inequality of ants is inherent through birth and determined by developmental factors early on. Yet, although there is a fundamental hierarchy in an ant colony, the ants coexist in a remarkable fashion. The queen-ant does not delegate duties to the other ants, but strangely, the ants choose their tasks out of preference for the sound functioning of the colony. In the words of myrmecologist Walter Tschinkel “The colony is a kind of creature—a superorganism” (Humphreys, McClintock).
And what have we gained from this knowledge? For one, we must understand that the inequality in society is a natural occurrence, and it is not a stretch to say that humans face inequality from the start just as ants do. Another is that there is a steep contrast between the way ants and humans think. Ants accept their roles in society and place their value of life on the betterment of society. Intuitively we can say humans profess that same value. However, humans have made the distinction between equality and inequality, and in reaching solely for the positive side known as equality, we have raised our expectations, our pity accentuated, to achieve something utopic but unnatural. In this case, Rousseau wants to turn back time and contain human progression to pre-societal dominance, but wrongly claims that this is the cause for inequality. Inequality was always there, and the only thing that has changed to make us feel this way is our perception, reflection, and our expectation. Therefore, we feel a pity greater than that which we have felt in the past, and we have given the idea of inequality an unnatural meaning that errs from its reality. Perhaps the greatest gift humans have developed is the desire for good, truly, but we must understand (without the care for redundancy), that inequality is natural, and that ant colonies and human societies are not much different, except for the fact that ants have an unknowing acceptance of their lives while we have giant expectations only meant for our enlightened minds.
Works Cited
“Ant Colonies and Social Structure | Terminix.” Termite Control & Home Termite Inspections, www.terminix.com/blog/education/what-is-an-ant-colony. Accessed 15 Nov. 2017.
Google Images. Accessed 16 Nov. 2017.
Humphreys, Brent, and Jack McClintock. “The Secret Life of Ants.” Discover Magazine, 7 Nov. 2003, discovermagazine.com/2003/nov/the-secret-life-of-ants. Accessed 15 Nov. 2017.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, and Donald A. Cress. The Basic Political Writings. Hackett, 2012.
Humanities Lore 