Skip to main content

“Pascal, you are an idealist; you cannot change human Nature. Humans will always try to cheat and maximise their personal gain. That is the way it is. It is dangerous to pretend humans are different.”

Ah yes the ancient wisdom of boardroom sages finance bros and libertarian Redditors. The eternal unshakable truth that just so happens to justify their own insatiable greed. What a stunning coincidence. It’s funny how the people most invested in this myth are the ones who own everything.

This is not just a misunderstanding of human nature—it’s a useful little scam a self-serving fairy tale that has fueled centuries of inequality exploitation and planetary destruction. It tells workers that low wages and miserable working conditions are just “how the world works.” It tells the dispossessed that their suffering is their own personal failure. And most conveniently it lets billionaires off the hook because well if selfishness is just human nature then hoarding obscene wealth while the planet burns is simply “rational.”

But let’s be honest. If selfishness is so universal why do the most powerful demand self-sacrifice from everyone else? Why must workers “tighten their belts” while their CEOs pocket salaries that could fund a small nation? Why are the poor expected to be grateful for scraps while tech billionaires build bunkers in New Zealand? If greed were really baked into our DNA wouldn’t it be a little more evenly distributed? Instead we have a system where selfishness is ruthlessly punished for some and endlessly rewarded for others.

The bourgeoisie preaches scarcity while hoarding obscene abundance. They love free markets—until they need a bailout. They praise competition—until their monopolies are threatened. They glorify individual responsibility—until it’s time to inherit their daddy’s hedge fund. These people would love for you to believe that selfishness is your birthright because it makes their grotesque accumulation of wealth seem like destiny rather than a rigged game.

A myth built to justify power

The idea that humans are innately selfish isn’t just an outdated theory—it’s an ideological bludgeon. It props up capitalism meritocracy hustle culture and every other grift that turns collective suffering into private yachts. It tells you that your problems are personal that your failures are your own and that any attempt to build a fairer world is both naïve and futile.

It’s a brilliant system really. Convince enough people that fairness is unnatural that greed is destiny and that resistance is futile and they won’t just accept their own exploitation—they’ll defend it.

The problem is not “human nature.” The problem is a system that rewards some behaviors and crushes others. If you scam millions of people through a Ponzi scheme you’re a captain of industry. If you steal a loaf of bread you’re a menace to society. If you exploit workers you’re a job creator. If workers organize they’re a threat to the economy. The system doesn’t just tolerate selfishness—it enshrines it as a virtue as long as the right people are being selfish.

Science has already debunked this myth

The notion that humans are nothing but ruthless calculating profit-maximizers would be laughable if it weren’t so persistent. Science has already shredded this nonsense. Neuroscience shows that the brain’s reward system lights up for altruism just as much as for personal gain. Behavioral economics proves that fairness reciprocity and trust often override self-interest. Sociology shows that strong social norms and community trust shape behavior far more than any imaginary “rational actor.” Anthropology makes it clear that not all cultures even recognize this kind of rugged individualism as a meaningful way to live.

And yet despite all this evidence the myth trudges on because facts are irrelevant when ideology is at stake. The people most invested in keeping this story alive aren’t interested in what science says about human nature. They’re interested in what the story allows them to do.

The social construction of ‘human nature’

If selfishness were truly a universal human trait then why has it only been enshrined as a dominant worldview in the last few centuries? Why does it align so perfectly with the rise of capitalism? Feudal societies didn’t believe this nonsense. Indigenous cultures often emphasize community over individual accumulation. Even within capitalism we see acts of mutual aid solidarity and cooperation every single day.

Michel Foucault put it bluntly: what we call “human nature” is a construct a historical fiction that shifts to serve the interests of power. If selfishness were some immutable law of the universe the ultra-rich wouldn’t need to spend billions reinforcing the idea. They wouldn’t need think tanks PR firms and entire media empires repeating it on an endless loop. But they do because it isn’t some inescapable reality—it’s a fragile narrative that must be propped up at all costs.

What can we do as designers?

Designers don’t just create things—they shape worldviews. Every product service or system we build carries an assumption about human nature. Do we design systems that amplify competition and individualism or do we create ones that foster cooperation solidarity and shared responsibility?

If we accept this myth we end up reinforcing it. We create platforms that reward selfishness decision-making frameworks that prioritize short-term profit over long-term well-being and services that optimize for user addiction rather than collective benefit. We end up serving the same cynical logic that keeps power in the hands of the few.

But we don’t have to. We can question why so many briefs assume self-interest is the only motivator. We can challenge clients when they dismiss systemic change as unrealistic. We can use speculative design to expose the absurdity of these assumptions and propose radical alternatives. We can push participatory design models that put decision-making power in the hands of communities rather than corporations.

Or we can shrug roll our eyes and keep designing the next dopamine-driven engagement trap. After all if selfishness is just human nature what’s the point in fighting it?

The real danger is accepting the myth

The greatest threat to change isn’t idealism—it’s resignation. The belief that humans are inherently selfish isn’t just an argument. It’s a tactic. It’s designed to keep people compliant exhausted and too cynical to imagine alternatives.

We cannot dismantle inequality while accepting the logic that created it. If we want a future based on cooperation solidarity and justice we have to stop debating whether humans are capable of it and start designing systems that make it inevitable.

The people who push this myth have built a world where selfishness wins by default. That wasn’t an accident. It was a choice. And if it was a choice then we can make different ones.

The question is do we have the nerve to stop making excuses for human nature and start designing for something better?

References

  1. Neuroscientific research has shown that the brain’s reward system is not solely activated by self-interested behaviour but also by social and altruistic behaviour. For example, a study published in the journal Nature Neuroscience found that the same areas of the brain associated with pleasure and reward are activated when individuals donate money to charity as when they receive cash themselves (Moll et al., 2006).
  2. Neuroscientific research has also shown that our decision-making processes are often influenced by emotions and cognitive biases rather than purely rational calculations. For example, a study published in the journal Science found that individuals are more likely to make ethical decisions when they are emotionally engaged with the situation rather than relying solely on rational deliberation (Greene et al., 2004).
  3. Research in behavioural economics has shown that various factors beyond self-interest, such as social preferences, fairness, and reciprocity, influence individuals’ decisions and behaviour. For example, a study published in Nature found that individuals are willing to forgo personal financial gain to punish others who violate social norms (Fehr & Gachter, 2002).
  4. Research in sociology has shown that social norms and values can have a powerful influence on individual behaviour, even without legal or economic incentives. For example, a study published in the American Sociological Review found that individuals who live in communities with strong norms of social trust are more likely to engage in pro-environmental behaviour, even when it is costly or inconvenient (Stern et al., 1999).
  5. Anthropological research has also shown that cultural norms and values shape individual behaviour and that different cultures have different notions of what constitutes self-interest. For example, in some cultures, cooperation and interdependence are highly valued, while in others, individualism and competition are prioritised (Henrich et al., 2010).
  6. Research in psychology has shown that people are motivated by a range of needs beyond self-interest, such as belongingness, autonomy, and competence (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Additionally, research has shown that individuals often make decisions based on heuristics, or mental shortcuts, rather than rational calculations (Kahneman & Tversky, 1974).
  7. Gender Studies have demonstrated that gendered socialisation can significantly shape individual behaviour. For example, women are often socialised to prioritise others’ needs over their own, as they are taught to be nurturing and caretaking. This can lead to a tendency for women to put themselves last, neglecting their own needs and well-being in favour of taking care of others. (Gilligan, 1982).