Universalism

Universalism means several different things. For example, it may mean the belief that all spiritual paths are a way to enlightenment, God or some other variety of ultimate concern. I assume this is not what is meant here, but the belief that a single set of values applies to all humans, regardless of ethnicity, gender or other categories.

This is how i see that in connection with human nature. There is, firstly, a categorisation problem akin to various forms of prejudice such as sexism and racism inherent in seeing it as merely applying to humans, because there are other entities towards which we have duties which are non-human, and probably even inanimate, so so-called universalism is actually too limited.

Leaving that aside, however, there is variation in systems of ethics which seems to render them incompatible. For instance, attitudes towards sexual and reproductive ethics vary hugely among cultures and traditions. Taking the values espoused in the Torah/Bible, the general thrust of the value system seems to be about promoting its own survival. However, the Jain system of values is completely non-evangelical and exists in a context where it sees itself as inevitably becoming extinct. These are examples of apparent incompatibilities between value systems. However, it does seem to be possible to identify certain themes behind the value systems, for example, utility (as in utilitarianism), ahimsa (non-violence) and justice. These themes can be arranged in a hierarchy, where for example two situations with comparable happiness can be distinguished morally by choosing the fairer alternative. Even so, they cannot be arranged in a hierarchy where one value is conclusively more important than any of the others, so the situation is like the game "rock - paper - scissors": nothing is on top. This is known as a non-transitive hierarchy.

I believe that the explanation for this is that there is another set of ethical principles which determine the nature of value systems, but which are not conceivable to the human mind, but whose existence can be deduced from the fact that values appear to be incommensurable. Ultimately, there are universal values, but they are inconceivable. I don't think their existence commits one to belief in God, although that is one solution. They are more like linguistic universals, but unlike them, they are not quantifiable. Also, they differ from a Chomskian understanding of the nature of linguistic universals in that although they are like a "deep grammar", this does not necessarily reflect any physical structure of the central nervous system. They are more like the foundations of mathematics.

So, i think that part of the human condition, i.e. human nature, is to find a value system. This is often decided by the conventions of one's community or society, but it can go beyond that and still be ethical. Having said that, there are humans who lack a moral dimension, for instance those described as dyssocial or psychopaths, and possibly also those on the autistic spectrum.