Tuesday 15 September 2009

The answer to human nature and the meaning of life.

What I seem to have stumbled across is an ontological argument of human nature.

Simply put, the question of human nature is the question what is man, his essence and purpose, his meaning. In fact the question of human nature is on the same par as the meaning of life.

So, what is the meaning of life? I say, the meaning of human life is itself a search for meaning. That may seem like, perhaps, a self evident answer, or a "cop out" but read on, there are real reasons at hand.

To be human, I put it, is to fall short of perfection. To try so hard and fail, the phrase could apply, “I’m only Human!” So, when asked as to the answer for what is human nature, it is simply to make mistakes, to not be perfect, but to strive. We as a race will strive for the objective truth of what is right what is meaningful, to search for that perfection. In essence human nature is an imperfect nature.

By perfection I mean to the extent that it fills its purpose The perfect hammer is that which hammers well.

This imperfection hasn’t arisen in animals because an animal’s nature is defined by its function and moreover, if a function it appears to not have, it lacks the consciousness to assert that – for that it is perfect within its own nature. Even within their imperfection, perhaps the plant doesn’t photosynthesize with the fullest efficiency; their function is as perfect as it can be over the evolutionary period (because that is its function). We, like the animals are driven to reproduce, to spread our genes as all biological organisms have as an intrinsic function. Yet we draw the line with that as a function, our nature as man may conflict with that idea, we step away from the mere reproductive mechanisms and search for meaning in that, a use and its possible repercussions. Again, even when we appear to have the option of asserting our nature as simply a reproductive one –to bypass all the issues- we as a race are able to shun it, question it.


You may have noticed that I am asserting man as a group, a collectivised species. Perhaps the issue is that to see ourselves as a group means we should have group agreements. Man as an individual, imperfect still, may find his purpose in meaning. Man in his quest for purpose asserts himself as an individual and frees himself from all other opinions and values. The nature of man again can be seen as one in search for meaning; it may just be that we cannot do it together. If the subjective nature of meaning is inherent, then embrace it as an individualist assertion and disregard all other ideas of meaning.

When we look at how human society has developed, with all our disagreements and variations it seems obvious that the subjectivity of right and wrong has wrought itself into our standards. Man’s search for meaning poses a poignant dilemma, how meaningful is something that no one else cares about. (a taste of imperfection there)

I care about knowledge, for me this is the most meaningful thing in all existence, ever; I cannot see anything else more great. However clearly many people would disagree, money seems like a meaningful substance. Sex, drugs, music (I’m going to avoid rock and roll) is all some thing people see as meaningful.


Man is an imperfect species, purely for the ability to question itself and thus search for other meaning and purpose; however, any meaning man asserts is imperfect in that not all agree. The perfection is lost.


Imperfection, sadly, seems to characterize all aspects of our life. They can be seen in the institutions of a society: Our education system which sees some children prosper and others fail. Our government, which, it is well known, can make bad laws and do the wrong thing. Our prison system is questionably a help or a hindrance, aiding to reform those criminalised or furthering their criminality.


But what is left after noting that we are imperfect, if all our actions are ultimately undermined by our nature? It seems that if we can discuss the idea of perfection, and in some cases attempt to carry out what we see as perfect, so we can see an ideal and aim for it, surely, then, we should be able to act to degrees of perfection. If we have the ability to strive, to assert and to question then we must have a degree of perfection, or at least perfection with a pinch of salt. It seems to be attainable that we should strive for the smallest degree of perfection, even if the dilemma still faces us that others disagree. If we embrace individualism and the search for meaning - we have human nature.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Try to be open and say something that matters =)