ABSTRACT
Some philosophers (Kant, Hegel) consider creation of ‘others’ a necessary adjunct to state formation and national solidarity, and one (Schmitt) even welcomes it. Others (e.g., Nietzsche, Habermas) hope to transcend this dangerous binary through dialogue. This debate, like so many in moral philosophy, takes place in an empirical vacuum. I attempt to offer a more complex understanding of identity and the diverse roles that ‘others’ play in its construction and maintenance. To do so, I draw on empirical evidence from surveys and laboratory research. I then turn to Homer’s Iliad, the founding text of a literary tradition, and Virgil’s Aeneid, its Roman successor. They frame the problem of identity and ‘others’ differently from Kant, Hegel and their successors. Their approach is more consistent with the findings of modern psychology. I conclude with a comparative analysis of Homer and Virgil in the light of modern psychology and discuss some of the links between this literary tradition and modern political practice.
