How would you define "Human Nature" ?

[Invisible Gorilla]

Human nature is used in different contexts nowadays. As a result, people seem to use this concept in different settings to imply different things. My question is how would you define human nature in a systemic way ? Is it possible define it in a way which minimizes any personal biases and is based solely on logic ,ie in a relatively objective way ?

Please include your justifications in your posts.

 

[JimJambones]

We'll need someone with more objectivity than humans can provide, like aliens!

 

[Sinny91]

I agree with the Borg, as Seven of Nine put it, 'humans lack unity and cohesion'.

 

[edanazli]

Irrelevant and insignificant

 

[kora]

Irrelevant and insignificant

Are you dismissing the question or answering it?

 

[Jennywocky]

The term can only be understood contextually and is difficult to salvage.

It doesn't help that it's generally used as an "appeal" argument -- "It's just the way we are" -- versus defining something specific and quantifiable. You can define it as "the range of behavior in which human beings typically act based on intrinsic instinct" or something, but proving something is inherent is a fun pastime in itself.

 

[edanazli]

Are you dismissing the question or answering it?

Answering it! That's how I define human nature; it's irrelevant and insignificant, regardless of it's alterable definitions on different contexts.

 

[Haim]

We'll need someone with more objectivity than humans can provide, like aliens!

You are not objectivity enough to say that.
Aliens intelligent,if exists,is wildly different from the human brain,if they are more intelligent they will just look at it as a system,where the only way to understand is total simulation,with different input through a whole life,people will behave differently.
Making such a complex system to a simple thing as the words "Human Nature" is the way human intelligence works,not necessarily aliens,like saying pc can tall human nature,no it have different way of function,due it can simulate the way we function it does not do it efficiently like we can not efficiently compute like pc does.

well that turned up a little mass,well your problem

 

[onesteptwostep]

I think I would be more apt to talk about humanity rather than talk about human nature. I guess this could be just semantically circumventing the question but I think there's a difference when you split the words into human nature from humanity. The nature of humanity I think is the same idea that's behind 'human nature' that's being discussed in the OP however, so I will take the liberty to play that card.

I would define the nature of humanity as something like, the striving to seek sacredness. But then of course we'd have to debate on what sacredness is, to which I'd say, a seeking of coherence, justice, peace, mercy, truth, and being.

 

[Haim]

I think I would be more apt to talk about humanity rather than talk about human nature. I guess this could be just semantically circumventing the question but I think there's a difference when you split the words into human nature from humanity. The nature of humanity I think is the same idea that's behind 'human nature' that's being discussed in the OP however, so I will take the liberty to play that card.

I would define the nature of humanity as something like, the striving to seek sacredness. But then of course we'd have to debate on what sacredness is, to which I'd say, a seeking of coherence, justice, peace, mercy, truth, and being.

That just pretending,hypocrite,when convenient and you are in the other side,you don't care for any of that.
Interests(individual and social),goals,human drive/weakness/psychology,feelings,way of thinking...............
The subject is more big than the entire internet,books and current human kind.

 

[Vrecknidj]

Scott Peck -- "Human nature is to wet your pants."

 

[The Grey Man]

There's no point in starting with a term and defining what it refers to in isolation from the context in which it is used.

 

[Invisible Gorilla]

As most of you have pointed out, this concept indeed cannot be defined objectively, let alone without considering it in a specific context. In my misguided attempt to find a 'not too subjective' definition for this term, I tried not to mention any contexts so as not to unconciously bias or prime the replies, thinking we could come up with a perhaps close to objective understanding of this concept (if such a thing could even be obtianed). I see now that this is not an appropriate approach, especially when attempting to answer such a broad question. Thanks for everyone's replies.

 

[Sinny91]

I would describe it as self destructive.

I think that's a consistent tendency of the human nature.

 

[Brontosaurie]

Human nature is to alter or control nature, pretty much

 

[Polaris]

^ Hmmm, yes - although wouldn't you say all life forms do this (plants having a more passive role here, but part of it nonetheless)? It's just that humans regard their role as significant, which would perhaps be one important aspect of human nature. Human nature is nature. Meh, I hate the word nature. Nvm, lol.

 

[Yandere-chan]

Human nature is used in different contexts nowadays. As a result, people seem to use this concept in different settings to imply different things. My question is how would you define human nature in a systemic way ? Is it possible define it in a way which minimizes any personal biases and is based solely on logic ,ie in a relatively objective way ?

Please include your justifications in your posts.

I would say that "human nature" is an evolutionary software that comes with us as we born and is kinda out-dated and unnecessary the betterment of the planet in modern society. Kinda like Internet Explorer, it does nothing other than attract viruses to your computer.

To push the species forward we should manage the part of human nature which was really useful during cavemen time but not anymore. For example, the irrational fear and hatred towards the outgroup or what is unknown to us, which is the reason why nationalism exists, and also the causes of a lot of wars and deaths. It is just one unnecessary and unproductive thing that makes people stand in the way of other people, when the time and effort could have been used to more important things like fighting poverty or finding the cure for cancer.

 

[Caffeine]

I would say that "human nature" is an evolutionary software that comes with us as we born and is kinda out-dated and unnecessary the betterment of the planet in modern society. Kinda like Internet Explorer, it does nothing other than attract viruses to your computer.

To push the species forward we should manage the part of human nature which was really useful during cavemen time but not anymore. For example, the irrational fear and hatred towards the outgroup or what is unknown to us, which is the reason why nationalism exists, and also the causes of a lot of wars and deaths. It is just one unnecessary and unproductive thing that makes people stand in the way of other people, when the time and effort could have been used to more important things like fighting poverty or finding the cure for cancer.

Interesting how you look at the whole population at large and try to extract the behavioral patterns. I was thinking to take an individual and extract the instincts/behavior, without the acquired tendencies.

for me, human behavior is to cry. hence the first thing an infant does is to cry. ;p

 

[nanook]

human nature

-raped
-drugged
-indoctrinated
-psychotic
-stunted
-fucked

babies cry all of the time, because we hit them, so they cry, because, you know, maybe they won't care to breathe if we don't force them to scream *derp* - and then we feed them toxic formula and foods that human nature can't handle, so they feel like shit and get used to it and can't tell upside from down anymore, nor sedation from wellbeing, because improperly digested foods are subtly psychoactive.

undead undead undead

 

[gilliatt]

Now, begging the question, "What is nature? Nature is existence-lthe sum of that which is. It is called "nature", when we think of it as a system of interconnected, interacting entities governed by law. So, "nature" really means the universe of entities acting and interacting in accordance with their identities." Peikoff
Man is a 'universal.' Say Tom, is an individual, a particular. In general, universals are easier game for the destroyer than particulars: the predicate belongs to none or not to some, they are destroyed, and the particular negative is proved in all the figures. It is easier to refute than to establish.
Anyway, the simplest statement one could made of man regarding nature is 'Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed.' To be commanded means to be made to serve man's purposes. 'To be obeyed' means that they cannot be served unless man discovers properties of natural elements & uses them accordingly. (This is reasoned fact).
E.x: 500 years ago, ask any man if man could ever fly, walk on the moon, hear a human voice from a distance, etc. He would say, "Nonsense." You are insane!