cases of extreme human brutality, like the mass killings committed by dictators and their forces, listing such cases is not sufficient for condemning humanity at large. Misanthropes have responded to this type of argument in various ways. Some hold that the underlying flaws are there in everyone, even if they reach their most extreme manifestation only in a few. Others point out that many ordinary people are complicit in their manifestation, for example, by supporting the political leaders committing them, even if they did not directly commit them. Another approach is to focus not on the grand extreme cases but on the ordinary small-scale manifestations of human flaws in everyday life, such as lying, cheating, breaking promises, and being ungrateful. A closely related defense of misanthropy is based on the actual damage caused by humans in the past. In this regard, Svoboda presents a thought experiment involving the discovery of a fully established ecosystem on another planet. This ecosystem is in harmony except for a single species that dominates it and causes one ecological catastrophe after another resulting in mass extinctions of other species. Svoboda argues that having a negative attitude toward this species is the appropriate response and that this case accurately reflects the role of human beings on Earth. An objection to this line of thought is that the negative assessment should not be directed at humanity but at certain social forces, like capitalism, religious fundamentalism, or imperialism, which are seen as the main cause of many tragedies. On this view, the proper attitude would be anti-capitalism or a similar outlook but not misanthropy. Svoboda rejects this argument by pointing out that these forces do not have a life of their own but depend on human beings to manifest them. In this regard, these forces are just different ways in which the negative value of humanity is enacted. A different problem for arguments based on human flaws is that they present just one side of humanity while evaluative attitudes should take all sides into account. So it may be the case that despite having very serious vices, humans may also possess equally important virtues that make up for their shortcomings. For example, accounts that focus only on the great wars, cruelties, and tragedies in human history ignore its positive achievements in the sciences, arts, and humanities. And the focus on negative exemplars, like Stalin or Hitler, should be