What's human's ultimate nature?
Without it the humanities and Social Connection is our life is limited descriptors of Surface phenomena like without physics, biology without chemistry or Mathematics without algebra. We can't live our natural life with enormously and truthfully enriched.
We believe human being is constructed in a way that locks it inside their fundamental and it was constructed to be understand by the mutual connection. We can reverse that inside note with the greater force to understand it self but not to promote artificial human breed.
There have been many types of human society, beginning with the hunter gatherers; through to horticultural societies; tribal, per- and early states; city states; nation states and also,we'd argue, the corporation (which has very close ties to the state form I believe). The ways in which humans express and live out their need for each other within these societal forms changes with each societal form. This is not to say that our DNA changes (though it does), rather that the social structures in which it finds expression give rise to different external manifestations of biological drives, including our understandings of and relationships with those drives. That is, human behaviour is a consequence of multiple factors, not just of DNA formation.
There never has been nor will there ever be a utopia. So while it strongly appears that one relatively stable constant of human nature is that we are social animals, while it may indeed remain true that we need to be needed, like to be liked and love to be loved, what seems to me to be a hiding to nothing is an attempt to recreate (from the idealized past) or create (for the idealized future) the conditions we consider somehow perfectly suited to our biology. There are too many variables, too much variety for this to result in anything other than an oppressive attempt to control people, to force as many of us as possible to become €good citizens' of whatever ideology.
On the other hand, inevitable change demands wise and intelligent adaptation. So it is equally true, utopia or not, that the way things are now, the way we have become used to, cannot be sustained indefinitely. I don't know if a €return' to a low-tech, horticultural society is upon us for reasons of entropy, peak oil, planetary carrying capacity, etc., or if what awaits us is more akin to a techno-utopia. I am not sufficiently qualified to judge. But I strongly believe that humans will muddle through whatever new forms emerge, and that their behaviors will adjust accordingly. Our needs for social interaction and inter dependency will take on new forms, find new expressions that will give rise to slightly different social challenges, slightly different social pleasures and conventions, all rooted in our biology of course, but blooming and finding expression in new-is circumstances.
In short, human nature is something of a red herring. There is no perfect social construction for our biology (social engineering), any more than there is a perfect human DNA. humans will adapt to it, change as a consequence of it, and enjoy and be irritated by it just as in all other social arrangements. Independence and dependence are not absolutes, nor is a particular type of community, nor is a particular set of human social expressions. Leaving self-destruction aside for a moment, my sense is that the trajectory of our progress is towards, simply because the market system that relies on wages and perpetual economic growth has been rendered redundant by automation and cybernetics, as well as natural limits to economic growth. Consumerism is as €true' to human nature as is communism or fascism, and will go the way of the dodo in due course. It may be that our lock-step addiction to entrenched cultural norms means the dissonance between the pressure of history and our inability to adapt intelligently to that pressure results in our self-destruction, but that would be a failure of adaptation, not (necessarily) a misreading of the pressure of history.
Without it the humanities and Social Connection is our life is limited descriptors of Surface phenomena like without physics, biology without chemistry or Mathematics without algebra. We can't live our natural life with enormously and truthfully enriched.
We believe human being is constructed in a way that locks it inside their fundamental and it was constructed to be understand by the mutual connection. We can reverse that inside note with the greater force to understand it self but not to promote artificial human breed.
There have been many types of human society, beginning with the hunter gatherers; through to horticultural societies; tribal, per- and early states; city states; nation states and also,we'd argue, the corporation (which has very close ties to the state form I believe). The ways in which humans express and live out their need for each other within these societal forms changes with each societal form. This is not to say that our DNA changes (though it does), rather that the social structures in which it finds expression give rise to different external manifestations of biological drives, including our understandings of and relationships with those drives. That is, human behaviour is a consequence of multiple factors, not just of DNA formation.
There never has been nor will there ever be a utopia. So while it strongly appears that one relatively stable constant of human nature is that we are social animals, while it may indeed remain true that we need to be needed, like to be liked and love to be loved, what seems to me to be a hiding to nothing is an attempt to recreate (from the idealized past) or create (for the idealized future) the conditions we consider somehow perfectly suited to our biology. There are too many variables, too much variety for this to result in anything other than an oppressive attempt to control people, to force as many of us as possible to become €good citizens' of whatever ideology.
On the other hand, inevitable change demands wise and intelligent adaptation. So it is equally true, utopia or not, that the way things are now, the way we have become used to, cannot be sustained indefinitely. I don't know if a €return' to a low-tech, horticultural society is upon us for reasons of entropy, peak oil, planetary carrying capacity, etc., or if what awaits us is more akin to a techno-utopia. I am not sufficiently qualified to judge. But I strongly believe that humans will muddle through whatever new forms emerge, and that their behaviors will adjust accordingly. Our needs for social interaction and inter dependency will take on new forms, find new expressions that will give rise to slightly different social challenges, slightly different social pleasures and conventions, all rooted in our biology of course, but blooming and finding expression in new-is circumstances.
In short, human nature is something of a red herring. There is no perfect social construction for our biology (social engineering), any more than there is a perfect human DNA. humans will adapt to it, change as a consequence of it, and enjoy and be irritated by it just as in all other social arrangements. Independence and dependence are not absolutes, nor is a particular type of community, nor is a particular set of human social expressions. Leaving self-destruction aside for a moment, my sense is that the trajectory of our progress is towards, simply because the market system that relies on wages and perpetual economic growth has been rendered redundant by automation and cybernetics, as well as natural limits to economic growth. Consumerism is as €true' to human nature as is communism or fascism, and will go the way of the dodo in due course. It may be that our lock-step addiction to entrenched cultural norms means the dissonance between the pressure of history and our inability to adapt intelligently to that pressure results in our self-destruction, but that would be a failure of adaptation, not (necessarily) a misreading of the pressure of history.
Source...