Well put. I do think that notions about ‘human nature’ are attempts at establishing grounds of commonality. The problem is that those notions can be, as was pointed out here, contradictory and all are in the end beliefs people happen to have. All beliefs are equally ‘unprovable’.

Beliefs divide people. They just do.

For commonality we have to look to the experience of material reality we humans share and our given capacity for navigating that reality, i.e. our rational capacity. Warren J. Samuels pointed out that human beings have no choice but to effect choices (choose among perceived alternatives and take action to bring that choice to fruition).

I’ve built on that insight to develop a strictly rational ethic of justice, one that involves no reference to anything outside of material existence. That ethic is ‘mutual respect in effecting choices’. I refer to it and its implications for governing the governance of society as “real justice.”

If curious, it is briefly summarized (in a “5 min read”) here in Medium. This idea needs advocates.