ABSTRACT
Even the first thesis seems harsh. Yet there have been philosophers who did not shrink from making it: Mandeville, La Rochefoucauld, Nietzsche (with his ‘beautiful German beast of prey’), and Darwinians. But the second claim seems utterly implausible. It runs so completely counter to all human inclinations that even the aforementioned thinkers might have had qualms about drawing such a consequence. Yet, who knows?—Some bold investigator might rather make this concession than abandon his central thesis. He could explain it to himself in the following way: we do not always shy away from self-incrimination, particularly not when we make the self-accusation in front of someone whom it flatters and places under an obligation; think of Wolsey and other politicians before their monarchs, or Medea before Jason. Another thinker who wanted to defend this improbable view might give it a different twist by saying that we have simply made the error of holding what is bad to be good.
