Human nature

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: 1427567124515.png (211.44 KB, 850x400, 17:8, KropotkinMutualAid.png)

Human nature Anon 03/28/15 (Sat) 18:25:24 c9c5be No.8358

We've all heard the silly misconceptions and myths presented as if they were a part of who we "naturally" are, this thread is for discussing human nature bullshit.

"As theoretical possibilities, one can envisage that man might be genetically determined as aggressive or submissive, warlike or peaceful, territorial or wanderer, selfish or generous, mean or good. Are any of these possibilities likely to be realized? Would the fixation of any of these dispositions, so that they become uncontrollable urges or drives, increase the adaptiveness of a species that relies on culture for it's survival? I believe that the answers to those questions are in the negative." - Theodosius Dobzhansky (evolutionary biologist)

Race:
"Humanity cannot be classified into discrete geographic categories with absolute boundaries. The human features which have universal biological value for the survival of the species are not known to occur more frequently in one population than in any other. Therefore it is meaningless from the biological point of view to attribute a general inferiority or superiority to this or to that race. The human species has a past rich in migration, in territorial expansions, and in contractions. As a consequence, we are adapted to many of the earth's environments in general, but to none in particular. Partly as a result of gene flow, the hereditary characteristics of human populations are in a state of perpetual flux. Distinctive local populations are continually coming into and passing out of existence. Such populations do not correspond to breeds of domestic animals, which have been produced by artificial selection over many generations for specific human purposes. The biological consequences of mating depend only on the individual genetic makeup of the couple, and not on their racial classifications. There is no necessary concordance between biological characteristics and culturally defined groups. On every continent, there are diverse populations that differ in language, economy, and culture. There is no national, religious, linguistic or cultural group or economic class that constitutes a race… there is no causal linkage between these physical and behavioral traits, and therefore it is not justifiable to attribute cultural characteristics to genetic inheritance. The genetic capacity for intellectual development is one of the biological traits of our species essential for its survival. This genetic capacity is known to differ among individuals. The peoples of the world today appear to possess equal biological potential for assimilating any human culture. Racist political doctrines find no foundation in scientific knowledge concerning modern or past human populations." - http://physanth.org/about/position-statements/biological-aspects-race/

There are no black, white, asian etc. races, it is nought but a social construct and a damaging one at that. The idea that there are a set of biological characteristics that divide us into races is absurd and to think that differences in disease patterns and sport prove that they exist is ridiculous (black people are good at basketball etc.). I will add stuff about aggression later if I feel like it.

Anon 03/28/15 (Sat) 18:54:50 c7828d No.8359

File: 1427568889878.png (153.37 KB, 1483x486, 1483:486, darwinism.png)

Anon 04/05/15 (Sun) 21:05:17 25b47d No.8469

Aggression:
Another myth about human nature is that if you strip away civilization and culture that what will appear is an aggressive, violent and evil core, the savage beast within and that this is something that has become a part of us due to evolutionary advantage (especially males). It seems that one of the reasons this myth is so widespread is the violence that occurs daily between humans and the ways in which some social mammals act aggressively toward members of the same species, this of course is not sufficient as it ignores the context in which human war occurs and in the case of the mammals violence is not the main way the individuals of these species interact (and interspecies violence resulting in death is extremely rare in primates). >inb4 chimpanzees. See >>5556

"in major international wars people do what they do mainly because it is their duty in the role they occupy; combatants in institutionalized wars do not fight primarily because they are aggressive" - Robert Hinde, zoologist.

"no work has demonstrated that non-pathological humans have an inborn propensity to violence, and comparisons of males and females are uniformly complicated, qualified, and debatable. The growing appreciation that genetic expression occurs within a system of biological systems, all with environmental inputs, greatly complicates key issues." - Brian Ferguson, anthropologist

Is violence and aggression a central part of human nature? No. You may see news of murder, rape and war on the news all of the time but ask yourselves this: Is this the way the majority of humans choose to interact, is it the main way that you interact with others; your friends, strangers etc., what percentage of the human population is actively engaging in war? What is aggression? It is not something that can be examined evolutionarily in the same way as a tooth or hair colour. if you look at the fossil records of human and potential human ancestors from ~6 million years ago to ~12,000 years ago there are at best only a few examples of possible death due to another individual of the same species, warfare is a relatively modern human behaviour.

I would recommend the book Race, monogamy and other lies they told you: busting myths about human nature by Agustin Fuentes if you're interested in human nature (pretty good intro). This is a bit light as I don't have much time but I will add more when I'm in the mood, I would appreciate it if you all would too, even if it's simple questions that we could ask one another.