It's Human Nature!

[Zang3tsu]

You know when people discuss things most of the time you hear, "Well, It's human nature", for example topics of war. What I am wondering is whether or not that is acceptable reason. I see this two sides of this.

1) As far as we know we are the most intelligent species on the planet, we are conscious of us and our surroundings and we are able to think logically. With that comes understanding and the ability to change.

2) We are not perfect. We evolved presumably from an animal. If not we are still limited to primative instinct and behaviour.

So can the saying "It's human nature." be a scapegoat or an unchangeable truth about our species, and are we just lazy to fix or put forth steps to change for the better, or are we naive to even try.

[Pal_dekoderis]

Hmm... You see we are the smartest species but we still are animal and it's something we can't change we still have animalic instincs so we have our natural behaviuor. I personaly believe that people cant create something whit out distroing if we think how much we ditrou to built a simple wood box we'll be amzed :)

[Nakor]

no i dont' think it can be a scapegoat. the person would have to support their idea that its human nature to have war.

someone could argue it is natural for humans to live in peace and that war is something unnatural.

[lilmzk]

Well I think that if humans were so great then we wouldn't have things like war. It's the fact that humans all want to be the best that causes it. We aren't perfect and yea we have animal instincts but if we wanna be the best we should stopping killing each other off all the time. I think that humans could change a little but they have to want to first.

[Rockreaper]

No, I don't believe it can be a scapegoat for anything. It can be an indicator or an at least part of an explenation to a behavior, but never an excuse.

[Zang3tsu]

Well its "human nature" to surivive, part of that is the ability to defend one self against any threat, aggression can be said to be part of that natural essences of mankind.

[Nakor]

Well its "human nature" to surivive, part of that is the ability to defend one self against any threat, aggression can be said to be part of that natural essences of mankind.
is it?
what about people who sacrifice their lives for others. if its in human nature for us to survive, then no one would sacrifice their lives for another.

[earthshine]

it is not a scapegoat, its the truth. we humans are not as far removed from animals as we like to think, emotions and primitive fears still govern much of our daily lives.


for instance, the entie buisness of marketing plays into our primal needs and urges. fear is the ultimate marketing tool, all our hailed logic goes out the window when we are scared enough, and marketers know this.


the message is "if you don't buy this, you are inferior to those that do", this triggers fear on an instinctual level, as feeling weaker than those around you is akin to the primal feeling of being prey

[Zang3tsu]

is it?
what about people who sacrifice their lives for others. if its in human nature for us to survive, then no one would sacrifice their lives for another.

Thats because people also have feelings. If it was natural for people to be non ego-centric, we wouldn't have had/have most of the problems we had in the past and I wouldnt be making this thread either.

ES: Then the next question is can that be changed?

[earthshine]

ES: Then the next question is can that be changed?


thats like asking can a lion's desire for meat be changed, its not possible, at least, not without a price.


these instincts are written into our DNA, our core. they don't just make up the negative things either. many of our better emotions like love and pleasure are also rooted in instinct. unless we wanyt humanity to become biological robots, we need them

[Zang3tsu]

thats like asking can a lion's desire for meat be changed, its not possible, at least, not without a price.


these instincts are written into our DNA, our core. they don't just make up the negative things either. many of our better emotions like love and pleasure are also rooted in instinct. unless we wanyt humanity to become biological robots, we need them

You must fear the age of bio genetic engineering huh?

Well I agree with you, but gathering the information on the past and the way someone or something can evolve I refuse to allow a statement of "It's human nature" as an instrument of easing defeat in our "weakness". If that makes sense. I believe in both, so naturally I am all for pushing to create a middle path.

[Nakor]

Thats because people also have feelings. If it was natural for people to be non ego-centric, we wouldn't have had/have most of the problems we had in the past and I wouldnt be making this thread either.


but if our human nature would be survival(like an animals) that should come first before feelings, since without surviving we will have no feelings.

as you can see im argueing against you about human nature being based on survival

[wiggely]

I wanted to point out that everything we do is human nature. Human nature refers to what we are capable/able to do. There is nothing that we can do that goes against human nature (being unnatural) because human nature is all that we are and do.

This means that conflict (war on a greater scale) is part of human nature just as peace/mediation is part of human nature.

In addressing the topic, human nature alone is not an acceptable reason for war. Human nature, like man (humans), is ever changing and evolving. In the end, human nature is what we make of it.

(It is us who decides what human nature actually entails by our actions. Although every circumstance we incounter has several forces pushing us towards certain choices, in the end the choice is up to us-we are never forced uncontrolably by "human nature." We are responsible for our own lives, saying its some underling force is just a way to releave oneself of the responsibility that comes with the desicion. People are accountable for their actions, if not sociey as we know it would fall apart.

[furious styles]

I raped a kitten once.

but hey....

IT'S HUMAN NATURE!

[Kagutsuchi]

I raped a kitten once.

but hey....

IT'S HUMAN NATURE!

u go girl!1

[hesd]

Here's C.S. Lewis on the Abolition of Man: Ethics and Morality.

http://s15.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=2S5H2EQD9JNC50ZAK2F7VFC9RN

This audio file absolutely is worth a listen.

[Insipidipity]

Well if by human nature, you mean instincts, then yes, theres surely a lot of things that are instinctual, we can't change instincts. For the most part this determines our inclinations.

On the other hand, not everything is instinctual, few things truely are, and people will likely scapegoat things that aren't into saying that they are.
For the most part, a lot of those things are embedded in human society.

Human nature is very basic and almost impossible to apply to most things. For the most part we're capable of going against our instincts but that doesnt make them any less instinctual.
Things more complex like Communism/capitalism or liberal/conservative aren't "human nature", they're completely human constructs. While they preexist us in the idea taht any definition can in theory exist before its defined(before we named cats, cats were around) but they weren't really existent in any worthwhile sense. Love and several emotions are very abstract and most likely a concoction of idealism by mankind rather than any instincts. We can try to link common threads of emotions but in the end, its not instinctual.

Now if you mean "human nature" as in whats "natural", well like they said above, anything is natural because its impossible for something to be unnatural unless there were supernatural forces at work, which haven't shown to be true.

[Zang3tsu]

Well given the difference between simplistic level of life and us I find it hard to say human nature is inevitable. If the effort is given to change, then I don't see many other limitations other than time. Biologically in order to evolve we can't stick to what is natural at the present. Take violence for example, it's quite clear why violence and agressive behaviour is a genetic implementation and apart of many species. The ability to defend one self has always been physical. We as a species now dont necessarily need a function such as aggression. So is there a way to change our own evolution in the direction we want instead of allowing certain aspects to thrive because we deem them "natural". I think we are getting close to a time where we can replace "natural" with state of being.

[wiggely]

Humans have actually very little intinctual behavior. An instinct is an unconscience innate behavior. With such a definition an instinct is much like a reflex, but just behavioral. If you try its really hard to find a human behavior that fits such a definition. We come to our behavioral actions mainly by cognitive techniques and not instinct. War and such actions are far from instincts.