Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
- Ferzo
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 4
- Joined: August 21st, 2017, 5:29 pm
Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
As individuals these variables in our own lives are right in front of us and are all we see, like paying bills and getting promotions etc. But do any of these things matter? Is there any value to pursuing these things that directly affect ourselves- or should we all wake up and think of society as a unit, and our daily tasks be directly relevant to the actual progression of society?
-
- Posts: 5161
- Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
The instincts of humans are too embedded within the complex brain of 100 billions neurons each with up to 10,000 synapses [connectors] for anyone to get rid of them. The instinct for sexual reproduction and other instincts had evolved from millions or billion of years ago.
What is needed is the individual[s] within humanity must strive for the following;
To ensure each individual use the various instincts and emotions optimally one must develop effective modulators [inhibitors] to manage the primal impulses.Anybody can become angry - that is easy, but to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way - that is not within everybody's power and is not easy. -Aristotle
The human sexual desire cannot be made redundant otherwise the human species will be extinct.
Research on extinct creatures has indicated there must be a minimum quantum to sustain the continuation of the species. Thus if the sexual desires of humans are extinguish then there is a likelihood of the human population falling below the minimal requirement and thus the advent of its extinction.
What is ideal is all individuals should act as individual team member within Team Humanity and aligned toward shared missions, visions and goals and generate optimal results that are win-win to all. How? - that require further philosophical discussions.
- Ferzo
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 4
- Joined: August 21st, 2017, 5:29 pm
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
- -1-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
I say you're right, but they are not a hindrance, either. Most of the behaviour in this set concerns competition within the species, not an inter-species competition. As such, they are still valid, as the competitive behaviours and preferences do allow more refinement of the overall average level of attractive human qualities.
People are becoming taller PARTLY due to this effect; nicer; better-looking; etc., as short people are less likely to find suitable mates, and psychos find it hard to find and settle down with a mate, and less better-looking people similarly are less likely to have enough beer or vodka and orange juice at home to initiate the mating dance to produce offspring.
There is no evolutionary advantage of being tall any more, or being strong, or good-looking, or even smart. But the intramural competition for mates within the species does keep on honing these qualities in the genepool, swimming pool, Liverpool and cesspool of what we call humanity.
- Ferzo
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 4
- Joined: August 21st, 2017, 5:29 pm
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
- -1-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
It's fine and noble to think that we should concert our personal resources to benefit mankind as a whole.Ferzo wrote:1, that is partly what I am saying. I think that these features are of hinderance in the sense that they will consume most people's lives and force them to think and act for perceived benefit of themselves as individuals, even though to progress humanity we should act for the benefit of society as a collective.
Unless you have a specific plan, or can find one with a specific, workable, and worthwhile plan, I say the people might as well consume themselves with finding a better body, mind and spouse, for themselves, squeezing out the competition, as this is not a hindrance. It only becomes a hindrance if this stops us or hinders us from acting for society's benefit as a collective. But right now society is well off with people being consumed. In other words, you can't fix something that ain't broke.
Maybe we should make the goal of benefitting society, and plan for it, by making and to make people nicer to each other, and better looking on the average, and less criminal-minded and more sexually available, don't you think?
- The Beast
- Posts: 1403
- Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
Here is Aquinas on eating habits:
Eating too expensively; eating too daintily; eating too much; eating too soon; eating eagerly (unusual pleasure).
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
Alas, since you are viewing this topic genetically, that is the most worrisome and pessimistic vantage-point on it. Namely, that in the past accumulating success, either physically, financially or through knowledge acqusition led to a genetic advantage. At the current time, it is a disadvantage. People of higher education tend to earn more and may be exercising both the inclination and the capacity for developing intellect. Unfortunately this cohort breeds at a significantly lower rate than their opposites. Thus the uneducated and financially disadvantaged are acquiring a higher and higher portion of the global gene pool every generation.-1- wrote:Ferzo, if I understand you right, you are saying that features of the human genome for behaviour used to be evolutionary advantages, but now the advantages are already established by being on top of the food chain and having no natural enemies, so all innate social behaviour patterns that would aid that are redundant, unnecessary.
I say you're right, but they are not a hindrance, either. Most of the behaviour in this set concerns competition within the species, not an inter-species competition. As such, they are still valid, as the competitive behaviours and preferences do allow more refinement of the overall average level of attractive human qualities.
People are becoming taller PARTLY due to this effect; nicer; better-looking; etc., as short people are less likely to find suitable mates, and psychos find it hard to find and settle down with a mate, and less better-looking people similarly are less likely to have enough beer or vodka and orange juice at home to initiate the mating dance to produce offspring.
There is no evolutionary advantage of being tall any more, or being strong, or good-looking, or even smart. But the intramural competition for mates within the species does keep on honing these qualities in the genepool, swimming pool, Liverpool and cesspool of what we call humanity.
What does this mean? I don't know but since impulsiveness is a trait that can thwart accumulation years of education, the current tenor of political, social and tribal discussions IMO are becoming more and more raw and impulsive, there may be a correlation. Extrapolating the current trend in this area forward is not a pretty sight.
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
That's quite a lot of unsorted generalization.Ferzo wrote:There are certain desires and compulsions that humans have in order to ensure survival, such as desire to sexual desire, animalistic behaviours that in modern society manifest themselves as desires to be rich, or be popular socially, and virtually everything else that constitutes modern human life.
'Animalistic' just means alive, doesn't it? We are, after all, animals and cannot become plants or machines through willing.
And then, you are overlooking a major component of the behaviour of social animals, which includes the submission of natural impulses to the appropriate rules (such as marriage bonds for sexual desire individual; sports and games for individual competition; merit-based leadership; earned rewards) and a social structure that can adapt to circumstances as a unit, rather than depending on each member to make the right decisions at the right times.
Human development is at least as much a product of co-operation as of competition.These things were once what was required of humans in order to develop,
These etc's are less a result of instinctual drives than of highly organized and stratified civilization - un- and anti- natural behaviour.but now the planet is overpopulated, and wealth is distributed oddly, etc.
How many other animalistic species have these problems?
How long were 'primitive' [undeveloped] prehistoric tribes stable in their number, wealth parity and social structure, compared to the duration of historical nations and empires?
How 'natural' are the desires engendered by mass advertising, and necessitated by industrial employment, and urban concentration?
How doe the animal figure in commuting to work or paying a credit card bill or lusting after an electronic gadget?
I suspect you have it exactly backwards. Wake up your inner animal; start thinking about what you really need, not what you're told to want.... or should we all wake up and think of society as a unit, and our daily tasks be directly relevant to the actual progression of society?
-
- Posts: 541
- Joined: September 23rd, 2015, 9:52 am
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
- Maffei
- Posts: 38
- Joined: September 7th, 2017, 7:34 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Spinoza
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
Ferzo wrote: should we not all stop living by these instinctual desires, and more primitive desires we have, and all live instead to develop our society and world?
- The same purpose was in the foundation of modern society: to deny our primal instincts in favor of higher values. How could this purpose be different now?
- If the way out is relying on something that does not happen in our body, what it would be? A pure soul? What is such thing as necessities of the soul if mine could be different of yours? A mediator institution would be needed? How can we assure that this institution is not attending instinctive necessities as well (in this case, understood as egoistic needs)?
This involves a desire to be remembered. Isn’t that a will to power too, I mean, of satisfying a desire? If my goal is to change the world, why being recognized matters so much?Ferzo wrote: Only the things we change about the world is what we will be remembered for.
Seems logic that reproducting our actual life does not change anything, but without basic necessities nothing can be done. Nobody can convince a suffering and hungry person to put higher values above his necessities (although he is the one who knows individualism better. His whole body feels what individualism does to society).Ferzo wrote: As individuals these variables in our own lives are right in front of us and are all we see, like paying bills and getting promotions etc. But do any of these things matter?
- Atreyu
- Posts: 1737
- Joined: June 17th, 2014, 3:11 am
- Favorite Philosopher: P.D. Ouspensky
- Location: Orlando, FL
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
But the whole question is how?....
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
Agree, in part because the terms are undefined (and misconstrued); in part because the desiderata are unspecified.Atreyu wrote:To me, the OP was kind of meaningless.
Which "good" are greater and lesser, and by what standard, according to which value-system?
I would. What is "above" survival? How is a large society of suffering individuals better than a small, happy band?I mean, who would argue with the OP's position that we should all learn to "rise above our instincts" so to speak?
- Maffei
- Posts: 38
- Joined: September 7th, 2017, 7:34 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Spinoza
Re: Are most instinctual human desires redundant?
Nobody would argue only if everybody pressuposes that mind can separate from the body. But I don't think that this kind of a priori would be adequate in a ethical issueAtreyu wrote: I mean, who would argue with the OP's position that we should all learn to "rise above our instincts" so to speak?
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023