Harari discusses how Homo Sapiens were able to move from small hunter gather societies, usually comprised of 50-100 people, to larger more complex societies. Insects live in large communities. But in inflexible ways. Homo Sapiens are unique in our ability to live in large and complex communities in flexible ways.
How did this come about? How were we able to move from small hunter gather communities of 50-100 people to communities comprising millions of people? Most historians emphasise the importance of complex language, which enhanced the ability to pass on accumulated knowledge from generation to generation.
Harari acknowledges the importance of complex language. But he goes a step further. He asserts that it was only possible for Sapiens to move to larger more complex societies because of our unique ability to collectively believe in things that have no objective reality within nature, namely to believe in myths. These myths include religions and other creation stories. But they also include more contemporary human constructs- law, money, nation, even ideas of human rights and justice.
Harari distinguishes between objective, subjective and inter-subjective phenomena:
An objective phenomenon exists independently of our consciousness. Radioactive emissions, for example, exist objectively within nature. These emissions existed long before people ever discovered them.
Subjective phenomenon exists only in the imagination of a single individual. It can change as that single individual changes. Thus, a child’s imaginary friend disappears when the child grows up and ceases to believe in it.
Inter-subjective phenomenon exists within the communication networks that link the subjective consciousness of many individuals within a community.
The inter-subjective is made up of the things in which many individuals, within the larger community, believe. Thus if an individual changes his or her beliefs it makes little to no difference to the beliefs of the community as a whole. Inter-subjective beliefs only change, mutate or disappear at societal level.
The inter-subjective has no actual existence within the natural world in the same way that radioactivity does. It is made up of the socially constructed ideas that exist in our collective imagination. Nevertheless the impact of the inter-subjective on the world is enormous: law, money, gods, nations, the notion of human rights and justice are all examples of inter-subjective phenomenon.
Harari’s categories of phenomena are not incorrect. But they may be incomplete.
A phenomenon includes a fact, occurence or circumstance that is observed or observable. It is an observable fact that, in order to survive, Homo Sapiens must interact with nature. We must do so in order to produce basic necessities for life- such as food and shelter. It is also an observable fact that, in modern societies, we produce more than the basic necessities. That we engage with nature in the process of production is an objective fact just as much as radioctive emissions are. Our interaction with nature, and the interaction of other organisms with nature, is something that exists within nature.
The interaction of Sapiens with nature through production in turn has a deep impact on the natural world and the environment. It involves the use of technology to transform nature and the way we organise production necessitates the formation of certain social relationships. That we impact upon nature, use technology to transform it and form certain relationships through the production process are all observable facts. They must exist objectively, although it is true that the way the social relations of production are perceived by us, invariably involves a high degree of inter-subjectivity.
Recognition of the objective necessity for Homo Sapiens to enter into productive processes and the fact that this involves organisation of social relationships is perhaps Marx’s greatest philosophical legacy. Marx believed that the nature of the social relations around production had an objective truth about them. However he also accepted that the perception of these relationships almost inevitably becomes distorted in the minds of the masses of people. This is due to the way the ruling classes could determine the ruling ideas- a process that he referred to as “false consciousness”. Much more problematic was Marx’s idea that heightened class conflict, around the capitalist process of production, would inevitably expose the falsity of the ideas propagated by the ruling classes to the vast mass of people and would lead to revolutionary overthrow of the existing order.
Harari recognises that throughout history the arrangements for production, at least in more complex human societies have necessarily involved the development of hierarchies and unjust discrimination. He recognises that due to discrimination “people belonging to different classes who develop exactly the same abilities are unlikely to enjoy equal success because they will have to play the game by different rules”. The economic game is rigged by legal restrictions and artificial glass ceilings. But Harari seemingly views the relations of production as having no objective reality, or perhaps as having no objective reality that is readily discernible amidst the mass of inter-subjective myths that develop around these relations. Thus he concludes that “the order governing people’s lives exists only within their collective imaginations.” But if Sapiens interaction with nature through production is an observable fact and this interaction necessarily entails the formation of certain social relations can it truely be said that the order exists only in the imagination?
Harari says that three main factors prevent people from understanding that the order governing their lives exists only within the collective imagination. First the imagined order becomes embedded in our experiences. It has a huge impact on our lives. The Western belief in individualism, for example, becomes embedded into every day life- even in the architecture of the family home with each resident normally having his or her own room or “personal space”. Second the imagined order shapes our desires. Consumerism for example tells us than in order to be happy we must consume. Third the imagined order is inter-subjective- existing in the imagination of millions- an individual changing his or her mind about the acceptance of a shared myth makes little or no difference.
Harari says that our network of shared myths, is called “culture”. Cultures are in a state of flux. They can be transformed due to interaction with other cultures or undergo transitions due to their internal dynamics. Cultures are full of internal contradictions. Harari says that the process of trying to reconcile these contradictions fuels change. There are clearly some shades of Hegelian and Marxist dialectical thought here.
Harari points to money as an example of inter-subjective phenomena with a huge impact.
Ten per cent of money is coins and paper. Ninety per cent of money is in fact no more than accounting transactions that recorded in computer servers. Yet money is a universal medium of exchange which enables people to store wealth and to convert it into almost anything else. It is the most universal and efficient system of mutual trust ever devised.
In some ways, says Harari, money represents a high point in tolerance. There is undoubtedly great discrimination in the way money is initially allocated. But once allocated, money does not discriminate on the basis of religion, gender, race or sexual orientation. Christians and Muslims might not be able to agree on religious dogmas. But they can agree to trust each other on the value of money. That the value of money is based upon trust explains why our financial system is so tightly bound up with our political, social and ideological systems.
Harari does not disparage inter-subjective phenomenon on the basis that he considers it only exists within our collective imaginations. On the contrary he sees inter-subjectivity as inevitable. He also accepts, for example, that a society which supports human rights and justice might be a better more happy society than one that does not. But he insists that neither human rights, nor justice, have any existence in the natural world. They are inter-subjective, not objective phenomena. And indeed this could be true whether or not social relations arising from production have an objective existence independent of our imaginations.
Harari also says that gossip also played an important role in the development of Sapiens as the dominant species on Earth.
Neanderthals and other archaic Homo Sapiens probably had a hard time talking behind each other’s backs. Gossip is a much maligned ability which is in fact essential for co-operation in larger numbers. The new linguistic skills that Homo Sapiens acquired about 70,000 years ago allowed them to gossip for hours on end. Reliable information on who could be trusted meant smaller bands could expand into larger ones.
The natural size of a group bounded by gossip does not extend beyond about 150 individuals. Even today most people cannot intimately know or gossip about more than 150 individuals. To bond larger numbers of people, fiction, or inter-subjective myths were required. Larger numbers of strangers can co-operate successfully by believing in common myths.
Read part 3- Yuval Harari- ‘Nazi Humanists?’ here.