We’re human because we use our intelligence for altruistic purposes, up to and including over-riding our survival instincts for the benefit of others.
Discuss.
Peter Hodges
Exploring the Craft of Writing
-
Novels
Thomas the Loan Adjuster
Comedic fantasy told from first person point of view.Alchemy and Empire
Epic fantasy with ensemble cast.Loss of Innocence
Military science fiction set around a near future first contact situation.
opposable thumbs and a voice box=humans.
Chimpanzees have both.
SplodeTV.com primal urges will be quenched
What makes us human is our drive to take care of others.
Pete, I find your stance laudable in light of your most recent post. You really show some altruism there.
The ability to effectively communicate details to each other. The ability to laugh, cry, feel remorse, sorrow, joy, and guilt. Emotions in general. Sure, chimps are sad when a mate dies, and it may express sorrow by wailing or crying, but it won’t hold a funeral, bury the body, and pray that the soul of the dead finds it’s way to a better place.
Also, even though our brains are similar in nature to other species, I’d venture to guess that we have a higher capacity for learning than any other creature on earth. If dolphins and mice are so smart, why haven’t they figured out a way to get off of our planet yet?
The question leads us to identify what separates us from the rest of creation. Being a fundamentalist, I tend to look towards the phrase “created in the image of God”. Many people skim over that mysterious and weighty phrase. Others quickly assume they know what it means. I have a few guesses. I imagine it implies we all have a unique eternal component called a soul that is separate from our minds and bodies. I assume this soul is linked to our moral conscience, which is to say I tend to agree with your original proposition.
C.S. Lewis writes a bit about this topic in the first few chapters of Mere Christianity. He addresses people that claim our altruistic actions are driven by an ancient “herd instinct”. If I recall correctly, he argues it could not be an instinct because we don’t always chose to follow it. It is a weak argument, but I could dig up the details if anyone is interested. Frankly, I examine my life and find Pete’s statement models it better.
Do you all agree we are the only creatures that can suppress an instinct or do other creatures suppress them for selfish ends? Any thoughts on the Gom jabbar featured in Dune and how it might relate to Pete’s original statement?
Hmm, I had forgotten about Paul Atreides test in the opening pages of Dune.
What Chris is talking about: The gom jabbar is a poisoned needle placed against the neck of a young man or woman. Their hand is placed in a box, where pain is delivered via nerve induction. If the subject cries out, flinches, or removes their hand from the box, they face death by breaching their skin with the poisoned needle. The axis of the test is that a true human will leave their hand in the box (akin to an animal in a trap) and lay in wait for an opportunity to strike at the one who put them in that situation (an animal feigning death). When the opportunity comes, they’ll remove the threat to their species. Enduring pain (extreme pain) without comment or physical symptoms shows a commitment to humanity and earns you the right to be counted amongst its ranks.
So according to Frank Herbert, being human means that you place the welfare of the survival of the race ahead of your own self, using your intelligence to remove threats to your kind.
I suppose you could carry either my statement or Chris’ statement to its logical conclusion and say that if we are indeed created in the image of God, and if God is “love” as the gospel of John would have us believe, then we are blessed (cursed?) with the unique capacity to lay down our life for our friends. (Greater love hath no man…) My clumsy words can actually be distilled into that single clause.
But I’m still not paying .50 cents more per gallon for gas. Bastards.