What's your outlook anons are you above human nature and desire or do you see yourself as a animal bound by the laws of nature. I've realized it doesn't matter what outlook you have, 95% of the time both kinds of people do the same shit regardless of belief, but what's your opinion anons?
How could I possibly be above human nature when I am human myself. Anything I do would be natural in a sense. Unless it's negative to my being or the species I can see the argument that its unnatural which we would have to dive into the subject of illness and free will.
Never mind this thread is making me scattered brained
Humans have a thing animals don't, a soul.
You can understand this in whatever way possible, but it is the only difference.
>>36367393
you can rise above you animal insticts through the utilisations of methods which lie outside of ourselves i.e. reason.
There's a clear difference between people who are at mercy to their every Id whim and people who exercise higher conscious and are cognizant of the fact that they are a creature with instincts and that they can actually reason whether said insticts are applicable in a given situation.
>>36367482
I see what your are saying but I would argue that our instincts are no different than that of an animals. We have climbed the food chain due to links of reactions that help us succeed in our enviorment. Our reasoning is our instinct. This revolves around the subject of free will that I mentioned in my first post. To help me understand your point better please give me your definition of instinct and reasoning.
Instinct to me is a behavior developed through natural selection that helps a species succeed in its enviorment
Reasoning is the process of resolving issues in a logical manner
My argument is nature's order still applies to us as humans because our reasoning follows natural selection. Which started with the most basic of instincts which is to prey and reproduce
>>36367090
We will forever be bounded by some limits. Regardless of what we are, we are a finite creation capable of finite things as an individual. Of course that may be even greater than most animals.
Hopefully over time we can integrate technology and become actual cyborgs to further human evolution.
>>36367810
Reasoning though can be argued as a conscious version of instint or should I say the next evolutionary step. So one can come to the logical conclusion that Reasoning is as primal as instinct.
>>36367810
>Reasoning is the process of resolving issues in a logical manner
The laws of logic which reason rests upon are outside of us. That's the beautiful part you're missing. They didn't evolve in us. We're reaching outside of ourselves to reflect and evaluate our instincts.We're not bound by nature, we're goddam critiquing it.
>>36367869
But is a creature with the capabilities to someday surpass nature actually bound by nature anon?
>>36367907
Reasoning is innate, and logic ultimately falls upon what the person has experienced. If all history textbooks said there never were world wars, and the entire world believed that, it would still be false in comparison to what actually happened, but true to the individual based upon their premise.
Conclusions are never concrete and probability based, and we never get to 100%. See Bayes Thereom for detail.
>>36367972
Possibly on a planetary scale but on a cosmic level we aren't shit, what if to a higher being or reflection and evaluation of instinct is just a higher tear of instinct, we may have broke boundaries only to reveal a bigger cage.
>>36368044
I can agree with this statement but the question still remains the same. Are we above those primal or should we segment ourselves as animalistic? No matter what possibilitys play out instinct still plays a major roll in our reasoning.
>>36368044
>Reasoning is innate
Not. Fucking. True.
This is why people assume their feelings count as reason. It's not innate. Humans are capanble of learning reason but we are not born with reason built in. Instead we are born with mental heuristics geared towards survival not reason.