[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 695 KB, 2338x1700, 1cm23jfn35dfmgv.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3624442 No.3624442 [Reply] [Original]

Do humans have a nature?

>> No.3624446

nope

>> No.3624997

as In an inherent character? Yea... every one of us has characteristics....

>> No.3625007

do orangutans have a nature?

>> No.3625020

>>3625007
yeah but they aren't humans

>> No.3625039
File: 97 KB, 577x580, 1363294905734.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3625039

>Humans don't have instinct

>> No.3625054

This is a great beginning philosophical question. Are humans good or bad by nature? Neither? It is important to consider.

It is often said that the good of humans is reason, what separates us from animals. So it would seem that cultivating our minds and circumventing baser desires is good.

But wait, what is good or bad in a state of nature? Am I really one or the other, or am I just surviving? Are "good" and "bad" defined by society?

But wait, I can be good in a state of nature, in fact, a lot of what's good about me is apparently natural-- benevolence, friendship, sticking to my own business, etc. So are humans completely self-centered by nature, or are we altruistic, or is it a mixture of the two?

Have fun, OP.

>> No.3625061

>>3625054
You didn't say anything but ask the same question over and over; and focused in whether we're good or bad. The OP asked if we have nature.
Men more brilliant than you have pondered about our state of nature and none reached a conclusion.

>> No.3625062

>>3625039
>/sci/

>> No.3625067

>>3625061
>muh men

>> No.3625069

>>3625067
>muh I don't know about Social Contract

>> No.3625080
File: 737 KB, 117x186, cutitout.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3625080

>>3625061

Ease up there, I was just giving questions to consider.

This is because OP's post is one of the questions that got me into philosophy as a boy. At this point I have read about social contract theory from Hobbes to Scanlon, but I just wanted to give OP some different ways of framing the question.

>> No.3625082

>>3625080

BTW, the person you were responding to here >>3625069 is not me. I wish we had IDs here.

>> No.3625147

not /lit/ related either

>> No.3625749

So which were the two kids that went coo-coo?

>> No.3625754

Do we have a nature? Yeah.
Can we talk about "human nature" in any meaningful way? No.

>> No.3625758

>>3625754
Why not?

>> No.3625766

>>3625758
I dunno, like ideology or something?

Seriously, to my mind it's wrapped up with the naturalistic fallacy and appeals to nature and all that. Regardless of how you might want to say what humans fundamentally are, there'll always be some guy holding up a plucked chicken and shouting "I got your man right here!" as it were.

>> No.3625767

Look up Ethology of Humans, nigga.

>> No.3625813

>>3625767
"just so" stories and biotruths with no hard data or hard science at all

>> No.3625846

>>3625749

top left, it's obvious which ones they are

>> No.3626226

Just go back to playing placescape.

>> No.3626246

That question is being asked by an analogy with scientific questions.

Check that analogy please.

>> No.3626268
File: 417 KB, 1919x667, Year 11 1997.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3626268

And now for the British equivalent of OPs pic.

>> No.3626694

>>3626268
Who?

>> No.3626698

'nature' is a buzzword, your question is ambiguously retarded

>> No.3626707

Do dogs have buddha nature?