Human nature

Post Reply New Topic

PN perfection doesn't exist either. If imperfection doesn't exist neither does perfection as you can't have one without the other. Perfection is an ideal that people get stuck in their mind, but that is all it is, I doubt there is any such thing as perfection in objective reality.

I think a big part is the way western society is going. People are fed so much garbage in the media, it colours their perception of how the world is : all reality TV, fast cars, models, you get the picture. I read an article that people in Asian countries are now experiencing greater levels of depression than ever before because of exposure to western media. They not only are seeing all they are "missing out on", they are adopting the (in my opinion) narrow shallow attitudes to success that is prevalent in western society. A generation ago, Okinawans were the healthiest peopl on the planet: now the youth think happiness is found in a Big Mac; and the rest is history.

Sorry, I'm ranting.

It would be good if people would stop measuring their lives by things that really don't matter.

I am not attracted to such things as fast cars and all the s**t the media sells. In fact I scrapped my tv license, got rid of many of my dvds (keeping only a few 80s comedies, a few ghosty flicks and some fred astaire and dance movies because they are a few of my favourites and I really want to tap dance like fred (or ginger) did) and refuse to by gossip magazines and newspapers etc (I do purchase some needle craft magazines).

I do not like modern day culture and wish to limit my exposure to it.

I don't care for power, I never did. It is why I don't give a s**t about things like superiority and inferiority. I absolutely do not care one iota for that way of thinking because to me it's nonsense. It's a cultural power trip which encourages the human race to ram its head up it's own god damned arse.

In fact I am concerned that the human race (in general) has rammed its own head so far up its own rectum that it will never get it back out again...

Gone are the days of community, gone are the days when people cared for each other...welcome to the world of selfish.

Power, greed, money...

I don't think it has always been that way. If it had been we might have died out as a species. At some point in our history we shared, we experienced community...no land belonged to anyone, we simply borrowed what we needed from it. There were no riches, there was no money....just tribes of human working together to survive. There was less violence before the rise of farming...farmers died younger than their hunter gatherer ancestors did partly due to increased violence and aggressive acts against each other. Usually as a result of wars and fights over crops if a neighbouring villages crops failed. When we developed civilisation we actually became less civilised...go figure.

Infection also played a roll from living too close to the animals we were farming and poor sanitation.

I don't think society made things better for us....it seems to have screwed us up.

I like to stay as far away from today's society as possible.

It has come up with a few useful mod cons (such as the washing machine and lindt dark chocolate...its not all bad out there) that I like to make use of, other than it doesn't interest me. The only thing I'd like to find is a mate to join me on my travels in life and my more natural way of life.

From what I have read it is suggested that hunger gatherer societies and nomadic tribes are not as violent as they were once thought to be.

It was also once believed that we made war with the Neanderthals but apparently we made nookie with them instead. Most Europeans carry some of their genes. Only those of African decent are unlikely to carry neanderthal DNA.

I need to do more research on this as thus far I focused mostly on nutrition.

Economy would have most likely been unimportant to nomadic tribes who did not stay in one place for a long period of time. They had no banks to put their money in and they probably could not carry a lot of possessions around with them. They most likely just shared what they found free in the land around them. No one owned any land in those days, they may have tried to claim territory I guess but from what I have read thus far they moved around and shared camp sites with others tribes where they exchanged knowledge, goods, tool making techniques and so on.

It doesn't sound very power hungry and war like to me. I think that might be a later feature after we stopped being nomadic and settled down.

There is even some evidence that suggests Homo sapien sapiens taught neanderthals how to make decorative jewelery, a predominantly homo sapien trait but found in neanderthal camps after homo sapiens settled in the areas.

I think it's quite possible that we both made war with and mated with Neanderthals. Evidence exists for both. Both are inevitable.

I think the proportion of Neanderthal genes within European DNA is about 4 percent.

It was stated that red-headed people were most closely related to Neanderthals.

Do you believe Neanderthals were a separate species, or a subspecies of Homo sapiens?

I've always had an idealistic vision of Neanderthals being a subspecies of us--owing to the negative bias exhibited toward Neanderthals before the 1970's or so.

Neanderthals, on average, have been found to have a slightly larger brain capacity (known as cranial capacity) than Homo sapiens sapiens. It is questionable, of course, how much of it was Prefontal. Previously, it was stated that Neanderthal diction consisted solely of grunts. Nowadays, however, apparently because of the proven presence of the hyoid bone, it is stated that Neanderthals were capable of producing at least most the phonemes which modern humans could produce.

This has much to do with human nature; Neanderthals are our ancestors--though perhaps on a parallel branch rather than on a direct line of descent. Almost like a Glacier-climate-adapted uncle of us.

This is a complicated subject and can go in many directions. I don't think I read anything particularly incorrect, but the hard part is determining true cause and effect, separating symptom from disease, and determining the relative weight of all the components.

Its made tougher to solve because humans (and so far as we know at this point, only humans) have in a sense a dual nature. They have their basic nature made up of instinct and adaptations but also a philosophical side that in a way thinks above or in contradiction (sometimes) of natural processes.

For example you might see Lions on a hazy afternoon ignoring the herds of prey that are quite close. But the lions don't attack because they are full, or tired, or it is too hot. They are not sparing the herd because they now think the herd also has the right to life and decided to become Vegans.

Spectulation in some quarters, that humans are in an abnormal stage has exsisted for many decades. And science has looked to nature for models that might provide clues as to what to expect. These are things like when a species no longer has any controlling natural predators, or when food supplies are limitless (or dramatically curtailed). But these are of course of only guesswork and limited value, as humans are not Deer, Rats or Goldfish. And how humans philosophical side might effect outcome has no parallel in nature to consider.

[As far as Neanderthals go, the current prevalent theory is that they and we are separate species but come from a mutual ancestor. The best guess currently for the ancestor is Australopithecus about 3 million years ago. Australopithecus btw, is Latin for 'long-assed-name people']

Here's a piece of the puzzle perhaps, but just a piece.

Hierarchy.

In animals that live in groups, there are normally hierarchies, or 'pecking orders'. In periods of limited food the animals at the bottom do not get any at all and starve or in some cases are killed.

So I wonder if part of the continual urge in people in establishing hierarchies is a survival instinct, that is to have a position on the ladder high enough to weather lean times.

That is probably not the only function of hierarchy. It likely has other purposes, such as procuring the best mate, reducing internal group frictions by establishing a kind of rank structure, etc.