HumANomaly

Jeanette raised the following in her response to "Identity."

To your concept that the negative behaviors that have been subsumed into "inhumanity" are unique to the human system, I would raise an eyebrow and ask for further clarification. How do these behaviors relate to identity? Do you see them as a necessary part of human identity if one has a selection of these characteristics or as characteristics that need adjustment or repair?

Simply put, a system's identity is determined by what it is and by what it does. This is not as simple as it sounds because distinct species share physiological characteristics and responses to stimuli. To illustrate, birds fly, but they are not the only species that fly. Bats also fly. But flying is an essential aspect of avian identity, though we do have instances of flightless birds.

The bottom line is that behavior is an essential aspect of identity, and any behavior that a member of one species does not have to learn from another species is natural to the first species.

The last question in the quote introduces the most important difference between humans and every other species on the planet. Humans are the only species that are not hardwired both physiologically and behaviorally. It is easy to understand physiological hardwiring. DNA determines what the young of a species will look like when it becomes an adult. Female young in mammals do not betray any signs of mammary organs but we know that as adults they will have udders or breasts. Those are hardwired features.

Behavioral features are constant in most species. A good example is diet. All living species need nutrition to survive but the diet of each species is defined by that species DNA. A species does not only need an abundance of food in order to survive; it needs an abundance of the diet that has been defined by its DNA. This is why species loss is likely to occur when drastic changes in the ecosystem occur that eliminate the food source of a particular species. Species do not change their diet even while coexisting with other species who have different diets.

Humans are different. As a species, humans are capable of changing their behavior depending on the circumstances. This is why our diet has changed over the millenia and why humans in different geographical locations have different diets. The same is true of our coverings and markings. Zebras have always had the same coverings and markings but anyone with a modicum of fashion sense can see the historic changes in human coverings and markings.

This indicates that whereas the behavioral identity of non-human species is fixed by their DNA, human DNA allows for a much wider range in our behavioral identity. Here we come to the tension between individual behavior and behavior as a species.

One benefit of hardwired behavioral identity is that it is unnecessary for that species to figure out what its correct or appropriate response should be to particular stimuli. When non-human species are hungry they know exactly what they should eat. The opposite is true in relation to non-hardwired behavioral identity. The first humans did not know what they should eat when they felt the first pangs of hunger. Based on what we know of the scientific process it is obvious that they had to rely on their observations of the eating habits of other species. Once that curiosity was satisfied other curiosities were triggered.

Given that range of responses it is not inhuman or nonhuman for any particular human individual to indulge in behavior from the dark past of human history or what is observed among other species. However, the individual's decision or ability to continue with that behavior will depend on the state of collective consciousness that is current. This is why shame is such an important aspect of human identity.

Whether a particular characteristic in a group of individuals requires repair or adjustment is not an easy question behaviorally. A child born without foreams is still a human being but adjustment or repair is advisable. A human who chooses to abandon coverings and markings is not engaging in nonhuman behavior and society has to be careful in its attempts to adjust or repair such behavior.

Self-destructive behavior is another story altogether primarily because of its cost to society. Humans are the only species that engage in suicide and self-destructive behavior. If these were not a part of human identity human individuals would not engage in it, because we have not learned it from other species. But they bring terrible costs with them. Apart from the financial costs of protection there is the cost of fear and distrust that debilitates us as a race.

It is to our benefit that we should determine how we lapsed into such behaviors because the alternative is to undo all the technological progress we have made in the last few hundred years. We now have the means to destroy large segments of society. If we did those generations that come later would have no idea what they should do with all the toys we have developed.