Human Instinctive Insecurity

[Agrippa]

Human Instinctive Insecurity

I try to explain my basic point in a very simple and abridged way:

1-Animal pre-human status - instinctive security, minimal and inflexible culture.

2-Sapient - instinctive insecurity begins, more culture but still relatively inflexible culture - no or very seldom conscious use of creative powers.

3-Homo sapiens - strong instinctive insecurity, culture very important, flexible culture, more often conscious use of creative thinking - which is still a very small part of thinking by the way - tendencies towards cultural degeneration strong, more creativity = more errors. Often automatic use of cultural traditions which lost their function or are even counterproductive or detrimental new innovations in culture for the individuals and group.

Its worth to mention that in phase 1 there was mainly instinctive behaviour - genetically selected behaviour to fit into a given environment.

Finally there is a parallel evolution of nature and culture - both influencing and being the base of the other, therefore in sapiens:

Nature - Culture

Biogenetic Evolution and information transfer - Tradigenetic Evolution and information transfer

a. Biogenetic potential: Phylogenic genetic heritage, biological potential.
b. Tradigenetic potential: Old societal traditions, neither planned nor understood (at least by most individuals).
c. Rational potential: Thin film of rules which individuals consciously accept and modify to use them for an intendend purpose.

The rational potential, especially if looking at the greater whole, the whole group, is still, oftentimes even in the most evolved humans we can find nowadays, underdeveloped to a dangerous degree if considering the technological and destructive potential our species has.

Genetically determined variation is still important, but after the realisation of phase 3 from above, its not that easy to recognise. Whereas at a primitive state individuals act obviously different in certain respects and this is mostly genetically determined, in modern Homo sapiens the difference are most of the time more subtle if its about the psychic level, but still change the possible ways of adaptation of the individual to a given environment in a significant way - f.e. general attitude, ways of reacting to given situations, ability to comprehend-intelligence etc. Thats where we can speak of types if we want to categorise this differences in schemes which should fit reality - racial, constitutional, pure psychological ones etc.

Interesting thread if its about that topic:
http://forum.stirpes.net/showthread....8485#post68485