Contemplating about the raison de etre of huma beings.

[hallenrm]

I am often perplexed by the nature of human beings.

 

As a scientist I know why an atom or molecule behaves the way it does. Its behavior is determined by various physical and chemical laws. But, I fail to comprehend why a human being behaves the way it does.

 

or

 

Why a human being decides to remain alive and struggle for existence even in the most adverse conditions? Hope does not appear to me a very valid common reason, because I have seen that many people continue to struggle even when there is no hope for change.

 

The only reason I know of, is the faith, that things may change because the God that overlooks all the actions of each human being, acts in ways incomprehensible to the individual beings, that can bring about a change in their fate, that is, their living conditions.

 

Can somebody, more knowledgeable, share his/her thoughts and throw some light on this. :D

[Qfwfq]

Why a human being decides to remain alive and struggle for existence even in the most adverse conditions?

Any creature who's genes don't cause a strong drive to survive and reproduce (and care for offspring when necessary) will be much less likely to pass these genes on. When genes are successful they propagate down generations, otherwise they fade away.

[Sacri Sankt]

I am often perplexed by the nature of human beings.

 

As a scientist I know why an atom or molecule behaves the way it does. Its behavior is determined by various physical and chemical laws. But, I fail to comprehend why a human being behaves the way it does.

 

it is a matter of complexity, of one set of properties emerging from an underlying, more simple set.

 

Why a human being decides to remain alive and struggle for existence even in the most adverse conditions? Hope does not appear to me a very valid common reason, because I have seen that many people continue to struggle even when there is no hope for change.

 

because humans know, deep down, that this life is the only one theyll get. theres no second chance, so why ever give up? however low the odds of success get, they still outweigh eternal oblivion.

[InfiniteNow]

because humans know, deep down, that this life is the only one theyll get. theres no second chance, so why ever give up?

Not all individuals fall into this category. Many believe very strongly in recurring cycles...

 

 

hallenrm,

 

I tend to agree with Qfwfq's point about the evolution of this trend... those that didn't have this strong drive died off. So, the drive itself was selected and passed on with increasing strength.

[Sacri Sankt]

agreed, but i think the two complemented one another. some kind of positive reinforcement, perhaps.

[Qfwfq]

Actually, Sacri Sankt, I think we both said the exact same thing but in different terms.

 

...this life is the only one theyll get. theres no second chance, so why ever give up?

But without the instinct, why should they care?

 

eternal oblivion

Which means genes not getting inherited.

 

Ask a 90 year old that has 30 great grandchildren if they're afraid of dying. The instinct is still there, they might still find a lot of satisfying things to do, but they'll usually tell you that when their time comes it just comes.

[Sacri Sankt]

hmm, interesting. and probably true. funny i dont seem to have that drive, tho. i mean, i dont want to die, but dont really care about the idea of doing so.

 

i like it when people say the same thing in different ways. it shows just how interconnected everything is. complexity is a wonderful thing.

[eric l]

At the risk of becoming rather personal.

My brother died some months ago from a virulent cancer. During his last months, he shared some of his thoughts. He was active in a lot of ways, among other things he painted water colours. On one ccasion, he said that it didn't really matter whether he could finish that one, and make an other or not, but that it was a sad thing that he would never see his grandchildren. (He also refered to our father who had never seen his grandchildren either).

 

Was he affraid to die ? I don't think so. But he regretted it. And I do not know how I would react in the same situation.

[hallenrm]

To sum up, from the thoughts expressed so far, can I conclude that the trait of yearning for survival among the human beings, is yet to be really understood in terms of science. By that I mean, physics, chemistry and biology.

 

If such is the case, we recognize that there is much related to our existence that is beyond the comprehension through the limited knowledge that we have acquired through science.

 

So, is science the supreme body of knowledge? :phones::

[InfiniteNow]

To sum up, from the thoughts expressed so far, can I conclude that the trait of yearning for survival among the human beings, is yet to be really understood in terms of science.

Well, this yearning about which you speak is by no means absolute. However, it could (and has been) explained in terms of the science of evolution through natural selection for those that do have it.

 

So, is science the supreme body of knowledge? :QuestionM:

Science is an approach. Science is a method, a way of discovering new things and understanding. Science is a process of study. Those who practice science are individuals, and will approach things in their own way, and add to our ever changing collective knowledge, but science is not the knowledge itself.

 

I like science, but I wouldn't call it a supreme body of knowledge for the reasons above plus some others. ;)

[chill]

I don't think that human desires can be fully understood or explained through evolution alone. I did, however, think so at one point.

 

For human beings, society is a very very powerful thing. In this age and time, I think that human society is a stronger selector than nature. And this has changed things a lot. For example, how is it that some people can be self-destructive? Bipolar disorder is a disease which has not of yet been rooted out of the human population, maybe because artists play a central role in human society. Their kind is "selected" by society as being fit for survival, even though nature might not. Inside humans, memes now play a stronger role than their genes in terms of behaviour (or so I'd like to think).

 

Selfless love? How people can sacrifice themselves for strangers? The genes in the person who commited the act might have passed away, but the meme was passed on, and does so every time the act is commited. This is the nature of social selection. Detachedness? Suicide?

 

So, though I do agree that we human beings are affected by the millions of years of natural selection that have made us, we are influenced by many other things. A few years ago, the thought that we as human beings were driven and existed for the sake of our genes depressed me, and it was this thought and music that brought me hope.

 

The will to survive is the essence of life; more fundemental even then reproduction (our genes reproduce to survive, not the other way around), genes, and DNA.

[Tormod]

So, is science the supreme body of knowledge? :QuestionM:

 

What has happened to you lately, mate? You ask only spiritual questions and you have gone out of your way to show the limits of science for no apparent purpose.

 

Nobody has claimed that "science" is the body of any knowledge. Science is - as infinitenow puts it - just a method. Science teaches us exactly what you say, that human beings are very complex. We can study and try to understand many aspects of human beings through a combination of many fields (physics, for example). But we can't gain an *absolute* understanding, and that is something science does not deliver!

[hallenrm]

Nobody has claimed that "science" is the body of any knowledge. Science is - as infinitenow puts it - just a method. Science teaches us exactly what you say, that human beings are very complex. We can study and try to understand many aspects of human beings through a combination of many fields (physics, for example). But we can't gain an *absolute* understanding, and that is something science does not deliver!

 

Thanx for putting it very explicitly. That indeed was the purpose of my post, because I often find that some people here, on Hypography, often forget that basic fact, and have a blind faith in the existing body of knowledge that is also known as Science.

[Tormod]

Thanx for putting it very explicitly. That indeed was the purpose of my post, because I often find that some people here, on Hypography, often forget that basic fact, and have a blind faith in the existing body of knowledge that is also known as Science.

 

But you forget that we are here, at Hypography, to discuss science.

 

Why don't you point me to ONE user who has shown "blind faith" in science?

 

If we started a car forum, would people start endless threads on "Why do so many people trust their cars? A car is so complex. I have used cars in the past but they didn't really give me any better solutions to things. Now I take my bike to work and I am very happy. All those with cars must not be seeing the deeper values in life". :QuestionM

[hallenrm]

But you forget that we are here, at Hypography, to discuss science.

 

The question arises, what is the usefulness of forums like Hypography?

 

I think, that the younger generations are progressively unenthusiastic about pursuing science, largely because they often mistakenly feel that there is not much to be discovered. Science teachers often teach science, as if it is the final word, celebrated scientists are worshiped like demi gods. There has to be a conscious effort on the part of more mature adults towards removing such misconceptions, and Hypography indeed can be one such attempts. To inculcate a true scientific spirit among its members. To enthuse them to become better scientists/teachers of tomorrow. I do see traces of this happening during my interaction with Hypographers in the last one year.

 

My posts are just an effort, to remove the stigmas and complacency among the potential young scientists. And I do believe that occasional skepticism can help in such endeavors:)

 

Why don't you point me to ONE user who has shown "blind faith" in science?

 

That's my hunch! and hunches do not always have solid pointers!

 

If we started a car forum, would people start endless threads on "Why do so many people trust their cars? A car is so complex. I have used cars in the past but they didn't really give me any better solutions to things. Now I take my bike to work and I am very happy. All those with cars must not be seeing the deeper values in life". :)

 

I do not believe that we should compare Hypography forum with a car forum. Unless it is a forum to encourage new innovations towards a car that can only be dreamt of today.

[Rade]

...I fail to comprehend why a human being behaves the way it does...

To understand this question, I think it important to remember that Homo sapiens is a primate and that many aspects of its behavior have genetic basis adaptive to reproduction and survival of its primate origins. Research shows many behaviors in humans found already in more primitive primate species. So, some primates "kill members of own species", "play", "work in groups", "rape", etc. etc. etc. Faith results from fear of death, which can lead to both good and bad behaviors. Of course, attention (or lack of) given to new-born by parents plays major role in human behavior--then transform this process back in time to initial speciation of species, to role of isolation of populations and adaption of behaviors to meet changing environmental conditions. I guess I fail to comprehend why a species that calls itself the "rational animal" so often acts irrationally.

[Qfwfq]

For human beings, society is a very very powerful thing. In this age and time, I think that human society is a stronger selector than nature. And this has changed things a lot.

Obviously, as we are a social species. Society is most of our environment, not the jungle. It's part of the evolution game. The fact that some species are social is itself a result of evolution.

 

For example, how is it that some people can be self-destructive? Bipolar disorder is a disease which has not of yet been rooted out of the human population, maybe because artists play a central role in human society. Their kind is "selected" by society as being fit for survival, even though nature might not.

While the Spartans threw malformed babies off the cliff, several people have been making it possible for Hawking to continue his life and career. The disabled are of less use to a society of warriors than to one of culture, science, technology and engineering.

 

Self-destructive behaviour is present because, genetically, the next best thing to saving oneself is saving one's children and grandchildren; the next best to this is saving one's brethren etc...

 

The will to survive is the essence of life; more fundemental even then reproduction (our genes reproduce to survive, not the other way around), genes, and DNA.

Here, I disagree but I also agree.

 

Certainly you could create many mechanisms that work in a similar fashion and to the same effect, a trail and error process that selects according to situation. Von Neumann published his general theory of automata, one could work out many alternatives to the DNA-polypeptide chemical process.

 

Also, many people have done things that are somewhat a replacement for bearing offspring, from the fac-simile of adopting children and caring for them "as if" to pharaonic things by which they are remembered through centuries. Many of us are concerned with how we shall be remembered.

 

While it's true that these are alternative forms of the same thing, it remains that it's the genes that got us here.